APPENDIX D 

ECOLOGICAL SCREENING RISK ASSESSMENT 

REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION REPORT 

STATE MARINE SUPERFUND SITE 

PORT ARTHUR, TEXAS 

Prepared for 

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

Region 6

1445 Ross Avenue 

Dallas, Texas 75202 

Prepared by 

WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. 

5599 San Felipe, Suite 700 

Houston, TX 77056 

May 2003 

W.O. No. 20074.515.012.2300 

004934
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Section Page 

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1-1

2. CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT......................................................................... 2-1

2.1 REGIONAL ECOLOGY........................................................................................... 2-1 

2.1.1 Terrestrial Habitat .......................................................................................... 2-2 

2.1.2 Aquatic Habitat .............................................................................................. 2-3 

2.1.3 Threatened, Endangered, and Species of Special Concern............................ 2-4 

2.2 SITE ECOLOGY....................................................................................................... 2-4 

2.2.1 Terrestrial Habitat .......................................................................................... 2-5 

2.2.2 Aquatic Habitat .............................................................................................. 2-6 

2.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species ............................................................. 2-7 

3. DEVELOPMENT OF EXPOSURE CONCENTRATIONS .......................................... 3-1

3.1 SOIL........................................................................................................................... 3-2 

3.2 SEDIMENT ............................................................................................................... 3-3 

3.3 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................... 3-3 

3.4 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................... 3-4 

4. DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES .................................. 4-1

4.1 SOIL........................................................................................................................... 4-1 

4.1.1 Site-Specific Background .............................................................................. 4-3 

4.2 SEDIMENT ............................................................................................................... 4-4 

4.2.1 Site-Specific Background .............................................................................. 4-5 

4.3 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................... 4-6 

4.4 WILDLIFE................................................................................................................. 4-6 

4.4.1 Determine Bioaccumulative COPEC............................................................. 4-7 

4.4.2 Select Measurement Receptors...................................................................... 4-8 

4.4.2.1 Northern Bobwhite .................................................................................... 4-9

4.4.2.2 Spotted Sandpiper.................................................................................... 4-10

4.4.2.3 Belted Kingfisher..................................................................................... 4-12

4.4.2.4 White-Footed Moose ............................................................................... 4-12

4.4.3 Input Exposure Parameters .......................................................................... 4-13 

4.4.4 Bioaccumulation Factors ............................................................................. 4-14 

4.4.4.1 Sediment .................................................................................................. 4-15

4.4.4.2 Soil........................................................................................................... 4-15

4.4.5 Select Toxicity Reference Values................................................................ 4-16 

004935
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

Section Page 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

iii

5. CHARACTERIZATION OF RISK SCREENING......................................................... 5-1

5.1 SUMMARY OF RESULTS ...................................................................................... 5-1 

5.1.1 Soil ................................................................................................................. 5-1 

5.1.1.1 Wastewater Impoundment Area ................................................................ 5-2

5.1.1.2 Wastewater Treatment Facility ................................................................. 5-3

5.1.1.3 Current AST Area...................................................................................... 5-4

5.1.1.4 Maintenance Shed Area............................................................................. 5-5

5.1.1.5 Tar Burn Area ........................................................................................... 5-6

5.1.1.6 Lauren Tank Farm..................................................................................... 5-8

5.1.1.7 Nonsource Areas ....................................................................................... 5-9

5.1.1.8 All Surface Soil - Upland Areas .............................................................. 5-10

5.1.1.9 All Subsurface Soils - Upland Areas ....................................................... 5-12

5.1.2 Sediment ...................................................................................................... 5-13 

5.1.2.1 Intertidal Area ......................................................................................... 5-15

5.1.2.2 Surface Nearshore Area .......................................................................... 5-16

5.1.2.3 Subsurface Nearshore Area..................................................................... 5-17

5.1.2.4 Offshore Area .......................................................................................... 5-18

5.1.2.5 All Locations............................................................................................ 5-19

5.1.3 Groundwater ................................................................................................ 5-20 

5.1.3.1 October 2001........................................................................................... 5-21

5.1.3.2 June 2002 ................................................................................................ 5-22

6. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 6-1

004936
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

iv

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 

Attachment A Ecological Survey Photo Log 

Attachment B Ecological Survey Field Notes 

Attachment C Wildlife Management Agency Species Listing Information 

Attachment D Exposure Pathway Field Notes 

004937
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

v

LIST OF FIGURES 

Title Page 

Figure 2-1 Site Location Map..................................................................................................... 2-8 

Figure 2-2 Site Habitat Map ....................................................................................................... 2-9 

Figure 3-1 Ecological Site Conceptual Model............................................................................ 3-5 

Figure 3-2 Sample Location Map ............................................................................................... 3-6 

Figure 3-3 Soil and Sediment Background Locations ................................................................ 3-7 

004938
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

vi

LIST OF TABLES 

Title Page 

Table 3-1 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Wastewater Impoundment Area) ........................... 3-8 

Table 3-2 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Wastewater Treatment Facility)............................. 3-9 

Table 3-3 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Current Aboveground Storage Tank)................... 3-10 

Table 3-4 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Maintenance Shed Area)...................................... 3-11 

Table 3-5 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Tar Burn Area)..................................................... 3-12 

Table 3-6 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Lauren Tank Farm) .............................................. 3-13 

Table 3-7 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Nonsource Areas)................................................. 3-14 

Table 3-8 Surface Soil Analytical Results (All Upland Areas) ................................................ 3-15 

Table 3-9 Subsurface Soil Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)........................................... 3-16 

Table 3-10 Surface Soil Analytical Results (Background Soil) ............................................... 3-17 

Table 3-11 Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Intertidal Area) .......................................... 3-18 

Table 3-12 Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Nearshore Area) ........................................ 3-19 

Table 3-13 Subsurface Sediment Analytical Results (Nearshore Area)................................... 3-20 

Table 3-14 Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Offshore Area)........................................... 3-21 

Table 3-15 Surface Sediment Analytical Results (All Locations)............................................ 3-22 

Table 3-16 Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Background Sediment).............................. 3-23 

Table 3-17 Groundwater Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)............................................. 3-24 

Table 4-1 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil ................................................... 4-17 

Table 4-2 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Sediment........................................... 4-18 

Table 4-3 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Groundwater..................................... 4-19 

Table 4-4 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Wildlife - Northern Bobwhite Quail 4-20 

004939
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) 

Title Page 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

vii

Table 4-5 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Wildlife - Spotted Sandpiper............ 4-21 

Table 4-6 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values of Wildlife - Belted Kingfisher.............. 4-22 

Table 4-7 Ecological Screening Benchmark Values of Wildlife - White Footed Mouse......... 4-23 

Table 4-8 Summary of Screening Benchmark Values for Wildlife.......................................... 4-24 

Table 4-9 Calculations of Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (BSAFs) for Fish Tissues . 4-25 

Table 4-10 Calculation of Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (BSAFs) for Invertebrate 

Tissues.................................................................................................................... 4-26

Table 5-1 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Wastewater Impoundment Area)........ 5-24 

Table 5-2 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Wastewater Treatment Facility) ......... 5-25 

Table 5-3 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Aboveground Storage Tank) .............. 5-26 

Table 5-4 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Maintenance Shed Area) .................... 5-27 

Table 5-5 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Tar Burn Area).................................... 5-28 

Table 5-6 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Lauren Tank Farm)............................. 5-29 

Table 5-7 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (Nonsource Areas) ............................... 5-30 

Table 5-8 Surface Soil Ecological Screening Results (All Upland Areas)............................... 5-31 

Table 5-9 Subsurface Soil Ecological Screening Results (All Upland Areas) ......................... 5-32 

Table 5-10 Surface Sediment Ecological Screening Results (Intertidal Area)......................... 5-33 

Table 5-11 Surface Sediment Ecological Screening Results (Nearshore Area)....................... 5-34 

Table 5-12 Subsurface Sediment Ecological Screening Results (Nearshore Area) ................. 5-35 

Table 5-13 Surface Sediment Ecological Screening Results (Offshore Area) ......................... 5-36 

Table 5-14 Surface Sediment Ecological Screening Results (All Locations) .......................... 5-37 

Table 5-15 Groundwater Screening Results (All Upland Areas) ............................................. 5-38 

004940
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED) 

Title Page 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

viii

Table 5-16 Groundwater Screening Results (All Upland Areas) – June 2002......................... 5-39 

Table 5-17 Summary of Constituents of Potential Ecological Concerns (All Media) ............. 5-40 

004941
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

viii

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

AET Apparent Effects Threshold 

AST Aboveground Storage Tank 

AWQC Ambient Water Quality Criteria 

BAF biota accumulation factor 

BCF bioconcentration factor 

BERA Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment 

BJC Bechtel-Jacobs Company 

BNA base/neutral/acid 

BSAF biota-sediment accumulation factor 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

COPEC constituents of potential ecological concern 

ECO-SSL soil screening levels 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

ER-L effects-range low 

ER-M median effects level 

FWCON PEC Freshwater Consensus Based Probable Effect Concentration 

HMW PAH high molecular weight poly-aromatic hydrocarbons 

LMW PAH low molecular weight poly-aromatic hydrocarbons 

LOAEL lowest observable adverse effect level 

LOEC lowest observed effect concentrations 

MSSL Medium-Specific Screening Level 

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

NWI National Wetlands Inventory 

ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

004942
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (Continued) 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

ix

OSWER Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

PAH poly-aromatic hydrocarbon 

PCBs poly-chlorinated bipheryls 

PEC Probable Effect Concentrations 

PEL Probable Effects Level 

PRG preliminary remediation goal 

RI/FS Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study 

SBV screening benchmark value 

SEM/AVS simultaneously extracted metals/acid volatile sulfide 

SMS SITE State Marine Superfund Site 

SQG sediment quality guidelines 

SQUIRT Screening Quick Reference Table 

SRA Screening Risk Assessment 

TBT Tributyltin 

TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

TDH Texas Department of Health 

TDS Total Dissolved Solids 

TDWR Texas Department of Water Resources 

TOC Total Organic Content 

TRRP Texas Risk Reduction Program 

TWP Task Work Plan 

UCL upper confidence limit 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds 

004943
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (Continued) 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

x

WESTON Weston Solutions, Inc. 

004944
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

1-1

1. INTRODUCTION 

Weston Solutions, Inc. (WESTON®) was contracted by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region 6 to perform a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) and 

Ecological Screening Risk Assessment (SRA) at the State Marine Superfund Site (hereafter 

referred to as “the SMS Site”). The SMS Site is located in Port Arthur, Jefferson County, Texas 

on the former Port Arthur Municipal Landfill. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Identification Number assigned to the SMS Site is 

TXD099801102. 

WESTON finalized a site-specific RI/FS Task Work Plan (TWP) in July 2001 to summarize the 

technical scope of work to be performed at the SMS Site (WESTON, 2001). The approach to the 

ecological risk assessment is specifically described in Appendix A and Task 6 of this July 2001 

TWP. All work performed as part of the State Marine RI, including this appendix, is being 

completed under Contract Number DACA-45-98-D-0004 through the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) Rapid Response Contract. 

The primary objectives of the ecological risk assessment is to provide EPA Region 6 with a 

screening that will assist in interpreting current and future impacts to the ecology associated with 

the SMS Site. The technical approach to completing the SRA was based in part on the 

methodology developed by WESTON and EPA Region 6 staff in the Risk Assessment Work 

Plan, Appendix A of the RI/FS TWP dated July 2001 and refined in subsequent meetings and 

discussions with EPA, USACE, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

and WESTON staff. 

The Ecological SRA consists of a screening level assessment organized into the following six 

primary sections: 

 Section 1—Introduction, 

 Section 2—Characterization of Habitat, 

 Section 3—Development of Exposure Concentrations, 

 Section 4—Development of Screening Benchmark Values, 

 Section 5—Characterization of Risk Screening, and 

 Section 6—References. 

004945
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

2-1

2. CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

The characterization of habitat is intended to describe the ecology and presence of ecological 

receptors, including identification of sensitive habitat and species of special concern on or 

adjacent to the SMS Site as well as those in the surrounding environs. The purpose of this 

discussion is to establish whether there is justification in believing that ecological receptors 

(including species of special status) are present or likely to be present on or adjacent to the site or 

in the surrounding environs. 

2.1 REGIONAL ECOLOGY 

The SMS Site is located on Pleasure Islet, a peninsula situated in Sabine Lake in Jefferson 

County, on the Texas-Louisiana boarder. See Figure 2-1 for the Site Location Map. “Jefferson 

County is located on the extreme seaward margin of the West Gulf Coastal Plain physiographic 

province and entirely within the Grassland Coastal Region of Texas,” (EPA, 2000b). Sabine 

Lake, approximately 70 square miles (mi), is actually a bay system that leads to the Gulf of 

Mexico via the 5-mi-long tidal outlet, Sabine Pass. Sabine Lake is considered an estuary due to 

the fresh water from the Neches River and Sabine River mixing with tidal influx from the Gulf 

of Mexico. This brackish water supports a wide variety of fish, crustacean, and marine mammal 

species because the estuarine ecosystem provides a shallow nutrient enriched environment. 

Additionally, the barrier islands that surround Sabine Lake partially isolate the bay from the Gulf 

waters and keep the nutrient-laden waters from being quickly washed out to sea (EPA, 2000b). 

The SMS Site is located in a humid and warm climate with a growing season of 245 days per 

year. The annual precipitation is 52 to 56 inches (in.) per year with the months December 

through May experiencing the most precipitation (WESTON, 2001a). The average maximum 

temperatures range from approximately 60o

F in January to approximately 92oF in July (United 

States Climate Data, 1997). The average minimum temperatures range from approximately 42oF 

in January to approximately 74o

F in July (United States Climate Data, 1997). This mild climate 

and long growing season supports a variety of vegetation. 

004946
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

2-2

The SMS Site is located in the grassy coastal area of southeast Texas. There are extensive 

wetlands present within 15 mi of the SMS Site. Based on a National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) 

map, the SMS Site includes 13 frontage mi of estuarine intertidal emergent wetlands (EPA, 

2000b). The upland area at SMS Site includes a few wooded areas, but primarily scrubs, shrubs, 

and grasses cover the landscape. These grasslands support a variety of reptiles, birds, and 

mammals.

The Sabine National Wildlife Refuge is the largest coastal marsh refuge on the Gulf of Mexico 

and is located approximately 13 mi east of the SMS Site (EPA, 2000b). It is approximately 157, 

951 acres (Parks of Southeast Texas, 2002) and provides a large area of coastal wetlands to many 

wintering and migratory waterfowl. It is also a major nursery area for many estuarine-dependent 

marine species such as alligators, reptiles, mammals, and numerous wading and marsh birds 

(EPA, 2000b). 

2.1.1 Terrestrial Habitat 

An abundance of terrestrial animals inhabit the wetlands and grasslands near the SMS Site. The 

Nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) lives regionally depending on soil texture, as 

armadillos rely on soft soil in order to probe for insects and other forms of animal life in the 

ground. The common gray fox (Urocyon cinereoargenteus) is known to exist throughout the 

state of Texas, but primarily inhabits the eastern region. The ringtail (Bassariscus astutus), a 

fox-like animal with the face of a raccoon, lives in the region of the SMS Site. Frequenting the 

brackish marshes are bobcat (Lynx rufus), mink (Mustela vison), and swamp rabbit (Sylvilagus 

aquaticus) (Davis and Schmidly, 1994). 

The coastal region has many fish eating and migratory birds such as the American white pelican 

(Pelecanus erythrorhynchos), the wood stork (Mycteria americana), the white ibis (Eudocimus 

albus), and the sandhill crane (Grus canadensis). Shorebirds include gulls and terns (Laridae), 

upland plover (Bartramia longicauda), sandpiper (Scolopacidae), common snipe (Gallinago 

gallinago), and short-billed dowitcher (Limnodromus griseus) (Texas State Historical 

Association, 2001). 

004947
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

2-3

Two bird rookeries have been identified within 15 mi of SMS Site including Sydnes Island and 

Dooms Island. The Dooms Island rookery is located approximately 1⁄4 mile northeast of the site 

and is a nesting colony for the black skimmer (Rynchops niger) (EPA, 2000b). Approximately 

1.75 mi northeast of the site is Sydnes Island rookery. It is also a nesting colony for the black 

skimmer (Rynchops niger) (EPA, 2000b). Both rookeries are managed by the Texas Parks and 

Wildlife Department (TPWD) [EPA, 2000b]. 

2.1.2 Aquatic Habitat 

Commercial and recreational fishing occurs year round at Sabine Lake. The total average 

commercial production is approximately 660,000 pounds per year (EPA, 2000b). Fish species 

inhabiting Sabine Lake include southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma), black drum 

(Pogonias cromis), red drum (Sciaenops ocellatus), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), 

northern red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus), and the greater amberjack (Seriola dumerilli) 

(Texas and Louisiana Saltwater Fishing Guides, 2002). The estuarine environment also supports 

a variety of crustaceans including brown shrimp (Penaeus aztecus), white shrimp (Penaeus 

setiferus), pink shrimp (Penaeus duorarum), and American commercial oyster (Crassostrea 

virginica) [TPWD, 2002]. Some marine mammals migrate or reside in Sabine Lake including 

the Atlantic bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) and the manatee (Trichechus manatus) 

[EPA, 2000b]. River otters (Lutra canadensis) also inhabit the marshy areas of the Gulf region 

in Texas (Davis and Schmidly, 1994). 

The marshy estuarine regions in Lake Sabine support a variety of amphibians and reptiles 

including the state and federally threatened green turtle (Chelondia mydas); the state and 

federally threatened loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta); and the state and federally 

endangered Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) (TPWD, 2001). Other amphibians and 

reptiles that inhabit the region include the alligator snapping turtle (Macroclemys temminckii), 

southern dusky salamander (Desmognathus auriculatus), eastern newt (Notphthalmus 

viridescens), bronze frog (Rana clamitans clamitans), mud snake (Farancia abacura), and the 

Gulf crayfish snake (Regina rigida sinicola) (Texas Memorial Museum, 2002). 

004948
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

2-4

2.1.3 Threatened, Endangered, and Species of Special Concern 

Within a 4-mile radius and 15-mile downstream distance from the SMS Site, federally listed 

endangered species identified include the Gulf saltmarsh snake (Nerodia clarkii), Black rail 

(Laterallus jamaicensis), and Texas diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin) [EPA, 2000b]. 

Additionally, the Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) was identified as a federally listed 

threatened species. The above species benefit from the salt, brackish, and fresh water marshes 

and estuaries around the SMS Site. The American swallow-tailed kite (Elanoides forficatus) is a 

State-listed threatened species that was identified near the SMS Site (EPA, 2000b). The 

swallow-tailed kite may inhabit the rivers, lakes, and ponds adjacent to Lake Sabine. 

The WESTON RI/FS TWP for the SMS Site outlined nineteen additional federally endangered 

species that exist within Jefferson County. These species are listed in Attachment C (TPWD, 

1995; USFWS, 1994, 1995; CLI, 1995). 

2.2 SITE ECOLOGY 

The SMS Site encompasses approximately 34 acres on Pleasure Islet. It is bounded to the north 

by the Palmer Barge Line site, to the west by Old Yacht Club Road, to the south by undeveloped 

property, and to the east by Sabine Lake (WESTON, 2001a). 

The Islet on which the SMS Site is located is a manmade landmass, consisting of dredge spoils 

generated during the construction and maintenance of the Sabine-Neches Canal. The canal was 

constructed between 1898 and approximately 1920. The islet that was formed was isolated from 

the mainland until a land bridge was constructed in the mid to late 1950s. The original landscape 

was heavily vegetated with shrub/scrub type vegetation. Similar vegetation exists on the islet 

today in areas that remain undeveloped. The upland portion of the SMS Site is representative of 

undisturbed habitat and includes larger grassy areas with some shrubs and small trees. 

Significant portions of the site have been cleared and graveled or are developed with buildings, 

tanks, and other facilities (WESTON, 2001a). Figure 2-2 illustrates the habitat of the SMS Site. 

Ground elevations range from sea level along the shorelines to a maximum of 11 feet (ft) above 

sea level in the north-central portions of the site. The highest relief on the Islet is associated with 

004949
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

2-5

the City of Port Arthur’s former municipal landfill, which underlies most of the central and 

northern portions of the site. On-site elevations range from approximately 2 to 7 ft above sea 

level. Drainage on the Islet is toward the adjacent waterways with surface drainage on the SMS 

Site occurring to the east-southeast in the direction of Sabine Lake. 

The soils on the islet are shallow (0 to 4 ft) and reflect the nature of the sediments dredged from 

Sabine Lake, primarily sandy silts and clays. The central portion of the islet, including the entire 

SMS Site, is underlain by a municipal landfill that is covered by up to 2 ft of fill. In addition, the 

southwest portion of the Palmer site and the northwest portion of the State Marine property is the 

historical location of the landfill burn pit. Shallow groundwater occurs close to the land surface 

and may be brackish, which would limit the development of larger trees or deep-rooted plant 

communities (WESTON, 2001a). 

The SMS Site shoreline has been heavily modified by construction of a bulkhead that forms the 

outer edge of a pier that runs along most of the property boundary. A small portion of the 

southeastern shoreline retains some natural features. The SMS Site shoreline varies; some 

natural shoreline exists in the northern and southern portions of the property. The nearshore 

central area is heavily modified by the presence of piers, slips, marine salvage debris, and several 

sunken barges (WESTON, 2001a). 

2.2.1 Terrestrial Habitat 

The on-site investigation area was the upland terrestrial area. The site visit to the SMS Site 

showed vegetation to be thriving, except in areas impacted by contamination. Plant samples 

collected during the visit were identified as follows, the overstory at the site consists of 

sugarberry (Celtis laevigata), Chinese tallow (Sapium sebiferum), and honey mesquite (Prosopis 

glandulosa). The herbaceous layer includes panicum (Panicum dichotomiflorum), olneyi-pod 

morning glory (Ipomoea trichocarpa), seaside golden rod (Solidago sempervirens), iva (Iva 

annua), ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), and muskmelon (Cucumis melo). Miscellaneous vegetation 

includes blackberry (Rubus), rattlebox (Sesbania drummondii), Brazilian verbena (Verbena 

brasiliensis), and Texas lantana (Lantana horrida). 

004950
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

2-6

The grassy upland areas of the SMS Site support a variety of ecological receptors. Mammals 

that inhabit the on-site area include the eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), eastern fox 

squirrel (Sciurus niger), eastern woodrat (Neotoma floridana), cotton mouse (Peromyscus 

gossypinus), common raccoon (Procyon lotor), red fox (Vulpes vulpes), Virginia opossum

(Didelphis virginiana), coyote (Canis latrans), woodland vole (Microtus pinetorum), armadillo 

(Dasypodidae), and axis deer (Cervus axix) (Davis and Schmidly, 1994). 

The SMS Site has a wide variety of migratory birds and waterfowl. The following birds were 

observed during the site visit: the red-winged black bird (Agelaius phoeniceus), snowy egret 

(Egretta thula), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), great blue heron (Ardea herodias), purple 

swallow (Progne subis), Brewer’s black bird (Euphagus cyanocephalus), boat-tailed grackle 

(Quiscalus major), marsh hawk (Circus cyaneus), western king bird (Tyrannus verticalis), 

northern mocking bird (Mimus polyglottos), belted king fisher (Ceryle alcyon), and lesser night 

hawk (Chordeiles acutipennis). See Attachments A and B for more details on site-specific 

observations. 

2.2.2 Aquatic Habitat 

The off-site investigation area was divided into three subareas: intertidal, nearshore, and 

offshore. The intertidal area represents exposed sediments from the top of the bank along the 

shoreline to approximately the mean lower low water mark. The nearshore area is irregular in 

shape and encompasses both shallow sediments and those close to potential upland or on-site 

sources. The offshore area is a rectangular area of about 150 to 200 ft wide paralleling the 

navigation channel and representing the area most heavily influenced by ship traffic 

(WESTON, 2001a). 

The intertidal zone at the SMS Site supports a variety of macroinvertebrates that thrive on the 

sandy shores of the brackish water of Lake Sabine. These animals include American oyster 

(Crassostrea virginica), macoma clam (Macoma nasuta), blue crab (Callinectes sapidus), brown 

shrimp (Penaeus aztecus), white shrimp (Penaeus setiferus), and pink shrimp (Penaeus 

duorarum) (TPWD, 2002). 

004951
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF HABITAT 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03

2-7

Reptiles at the site include the cotton-mouth snake (Agkistrodon piscivorus), racer snake 

(Coluber constrictor), and garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis). Reptiles and amphibians that are 

suspected to live on site include common snapping turtles (Chelyara serpentina), Gulf coast toad 

(Bufo valliceps), Cope’s gray treefrog (Hyla chrysoscelis), and green treefrog (Hyla cinerea) 

(Texas Memorial Museum, 2002). 

2.2.3 Threatened and Endangered Species 

An endangered species is a native species whose prospects for survival or recruitment within the 

State of Texas or the United States are in imminent jeopardy. This determination is based on the 

species status in Texas for state listed species and the rest of the United States for federally listed 

species. A threatened species is a native species that, although not presently in danger of 

extirpation, is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future in the absence of special 

protection and management efforts. A special concern species may be one of the following 

(USFWS, 1994): 

 Category I—a native species with a presently stable or increasing population that 

current evidence indicates is especially vulnerable to extirpation because of limited 

range, low population, or other factors. 

 Category II—a native species identified by technical experts as possibly threatened or 

vulnerable to extirpation but for which little, if any, evidence exists to document the 

population level, range or other factors pertinent to its status. 

Jefferson County, Texas, currently has 48 animal species that are listed as endangered or 

threatened under either federal or state guidelines. Attachment C presents a detailed list of 

threatened and endangered species that are found in Jefferson County, Texas. 

A review by both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Texas State Parks and 

Wildlife Department (TPWD) suggests that no federally or state listed or proposed threatened or 

endangered species are likely to occur at the SMS Site because of the general lack of appropriate 

habitat (WESTON, 2001b). 

004952
DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE

PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

LEGEND

STATE MARINE PROPERTY BOUNDARY

FIGURE 2-1

U.S. EPA REGION 6

CERCLA ID NO. TXD099801102

SITE LOCATION MAP

ECOLOGICAL SCREENIING

RISK ASSESSMENT

STATE MARINE SUPERFUND SITE

FEB 03 20074.515.012.2400 1" = 2,000'

03-0047 Fig2-1.ai

SOURCE:

US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, PORT ARTHUR NORTH

QUADRANGLE, 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC),

AND WEST OF GREENS BAYOU QUADRANGLE, TEXASLOUISIANA. 1993.

Site

Location

QUADRANGLE LOCATION

TEXAS

004953
DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE

MAP BASED ON AERIAL IMAGE,

MARCH 2000

AERIAL VIEWPOINT

P.O. BOX 692075-294

HOUSTON, TX 77269

FIGURE 2-2

U.S. EPA REGION 6

CERCLA ID NO. TXD099801102

SITE HABITAT MAP

ECOLOGICAL SCREENIING

RISK ASSESSMENT

STATE MARINE SUPERFUND SITE

PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

FEB 03 20074.515.012.2400 1" = 160'

03-0047 Fig2-2.ai

STEEP GRADE TO WATER

< NO INTERTIDAL ZONE >

ÚÊ

1 2

3

4

5

6 7

8

9

10

12

11

13

14

17

18

15

16

19

26

20

27

24

25

23

21

22

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

38

36

37

CLEARED CANE

< OCT. 2001 >

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

PLEASURE ISLET

SITE TRAILER

INLET / LAKE

SABINE

APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF

CLOSED PORT ARTHUR

MUNICIPLE LANDFILL

GULF / LAKE SABINE

PARTIALLY OR FULLY

SUBMERGED BARGES

°

WOODED

LIMITED

INTERTIDAL

ZONES

< LOW BANK 2-3 FT>

PALMER BARGE SITE

FORMER LAUREN REFINING TANK FARM

WASTERWATER IMPOUNDMENTS

MAINTENCE SHED

TAR BURN AREA

WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY

STORAGE TANK AREA

°

Background

Onshore Zone

Intertidal Zone

Nearshore Zone

Offshore Zone

Monitoring Wells

Fence Line

Sampling Boundary

Site Entrance

Site Photos (See Photo Log)

Source Areas of Investigation

LEGEND

004954
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

3-1

3. DEVELOPMENT OF EXPOSURE CONCENTRATIONS 

The estimation of environmental exposure involves the quantification of constituent 

concentrations at points of likely exposure. Constituent concentrations at these points (called 

exposure point concentrations) are critical in determining the amount of exposure and subsequent 

risk to ecological receptors. The development of exposure concentrations for this SRA is based 

on estimating an average or maximum concentration for constituents that were detected in soil, 

sediment, or groundwater. If a constituent was not detected in any sample from a particular 

media, it was excluded altogether from that medium. 

All current, future, and incomplete exposure pathways expected to occur at the SMS Site are 

identified in the Ecological Site Conceptual Model (Figure 3-1). Exposure is based on general 

assumptions for contaminant migration and transport from wastes to various media on and 

adjacent to the site (i.e., soil, sediment, groundwater, and surface water). Exposure and receptor 

information for the conceptual site model can also be summarized below: 

Exposure Medium Exposure Routes 

Receptor 

Group Soils Sediment 

Surface 

Water 

Aquatic 

Prey 

Terrestrial 

Prey Groundwater

Direct 

Contact Ingestion Inhalation

Aquatic X X X X -- F X X N 

Terrestrial X X X -- X -- X X N 

Notes:

X = Current exposure. 

N = Not evaluated. 

F = Future exposure. 

-- = Incomplete exposure. 

Discussion of the development of exposure concentrations for soil, sediment, and groundwater is 

presented in the following paragraphs. 

004955
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF EXPOSURE CONCENTRATIONS 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

3-2

3.1 SOIL 

In the ecological SRA, exposure point concentrations for upland soils were developed from 

known or suspected source areas (“hot spots”) as follows: 

 Former Wastewater Impoundments 

 Wastewater Treatment Facility 

 Current Aboveground Storage Tanks 

 Maintenance Shed Area 

 Tar Burn Area 

 Former Lauren Tank Farm 

Exposure concentrations were also developed for constituents in soil by grouping randomly 

sampled data from “nonsource” areas together and by grouping all surface or all subsurface 

sampling data together (as “site-wide” exposure). Surface soils were sampled from the surface 

down to approximately 6 in. in depth. Subsurface soils were sampled anywhere from 3 to 40 ft 

below the surface. The exact depth intervals for soil samples that were taken from 3 ft or below 

are presented in Section 6 of the RI Report. The spatial combination of hot spot and nonsource 

area and site-wide data was developed based on the approach that ecological receptors may be 

randomly exposed across the entire site or exposed within a specific location depending on 

specific activity patterns of each receptor. Figure 3-2 shows the soil sampling locations. 

Receptor exposure is representative of the average exposure expected to occur within a defined 

area of contact or the maximum exposure expected to occur at a single location. The average 

concentration was calculated as an average of all surface soil concentrations from all locations 

within a defined area of exposure (e.g., Tar Burn Area) and is based on either the 95% upper 

confidence limit (UCL) concentration of the mean or the straight arithmetic average in cases 

where the 95% UCL was less than the arithmetic average or greater than maximum detected 

concentration. The maximum concentration represents the highest detected soil concentration 

from a single location. It is important to note that in a limited number of cases, some 

constituents with a high number of nondetect data points showed average concentrations in 

excess of the maximum detected concentration. A summary of soil analytical data for hot spots, 

nonsource and site-wide areas, including average and maximum exposure concentrations, are 

presented in Tables 3-1 through 3-9. 

004956
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF EXPOSURE CONCENTRATIONS 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

3-3

3.2 SEDIMENT 

The sediment investigation was conducted in Lake Sabine adjacent to the SMS Site and is 

referred to as the “off-site” investigation area. Figure 3-2 shows the off-site sampling locations. 

The purpose of the investigation was to characterize the vertical and lateral extent of off-site 

sediment contamination. Based on distance from the shoreline, the off-site area was broken into 

the following three areas: 

 Intertidal Area, 

 Nearshore Area, and 

 Offshore Area. 

All three areas posed the likelihood of exposure. The subsurface sediment in the Nearshore Area 

was also screened during the ecological SRA. 

Receptor exposure is representative of the average exposure expected to occur within a defined 

area of contact or the maximum exposure expected to occur at a single location. The average 

concentration was calculated as an average of all surface sediment concentrations from all 

locations within a defined area (e.g., Intertidal Area) and is based on either the 95% UCL 

concentration of the mean or the straight arithmetic average in cases where the 95% UCL was 

less than the arithmetic average or greater than maximum detected concentration. The maximum 

concentration was calculated as the highest detected soil concentration from a single location. It 

is important to note that in a limited number of cases, some constituents with a high degree of 

nondetect data showed average concentrations in excess of the maximum detected concentration. 

Summaries of analytical data for the off-site investigation areas, including average and 

maximum exposure concentrations, are presented in Tables 3-11 through 3-15. 

3.3 GROUNDWATER 

Six monitoring wells were installed at three different locations in the uplands area of the site to 

characterize groundwater. Pairs of shallow and deep monitoring wells were installed at each of 

the three locations as follows: 

 SM061A – SM061B 

 SM068A – SM068B 

004957
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF EXPOSURE CONCENTRATIONS 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

3-4

 SM116A – SM116B 

The letter “A” identifies the deep well (< 40-45 ft) and the letter “B” identifies the shallow well 

(20-25 ft). Figure 3-2 shows the location of these wells in relation to the upland soil sampling 

locations. Due to the lack of a defined aquifer, groundwater was not grouped into specific units 

of exposure. Instead all sampling data was evaluated together in an effort to characterize the 

overall condition of groundwater at the SMS Site. Therefore, exposure concentrations were 

based on the maximum exposure expected to occur at a single well rather than an average of well 

data. The maximum concentration represents the highest detected groundwater concentration 

from that well. A summary of analytical data for groundwater is presented in Table 3-17. 

3.4 BACKGROUND 

Background soil and sediment samples were collected at specific reference area locations as 

shown on Figure 3-3. During the WESTON 2001 RI, three surface soil samples (SM133, 

SM134, and SM135) were collected from the northwest area of the SMS Site, and five surface 

sediment samples (RFW01 through RFW05) were collected from the area adjacent to Sydnes 

Island. The site-specific background values were calculated using the arithmetic mean for 

constituents with 100% frequency of detection or the maximum detected concentration for 

constituents with less than 100% frequency of detection. The analytical results for background 

soil samples are presented in Table 3-10, and the background sediment results are presented in 

Table 3-16. 

004958
On-Site

Groundwater

MARY

LEASE

HANISM

SECONDARY

SOURCE/

PATHWAY PATHWAY

and Sediment

- Lake Sabine

TERTIARY

RELEASE

MECHANISM

Leaching, 

Infiltration

Surface Water

and Sediment -

Lake Sabine

Soil

pills, 

eaks, 

unoff, 

erflow

Incidental surface water

ingestion

EXPOSURE

ROUTES

SECONDARY

RELEASE

MECHANISM

Runoff, 

Overland 

Flow

TERTIARY

SOURCE/PATHWAY

Discharge to 

Surface Water

Dermal contact with surface

water

Dermal contact with

sediment

Incidental sediment

ingestion

Groundwater

(drinking water) ingestion

Inhalation of particulates from

soil

Dermal contact with

soil

Incidental soil ingestion

Inhalation of volatile

emissions from soil

ECOLOGICAL

RECEPTORS

On-Site Soil

Terrestrial Plant

and Animal

Bioaccumulation Ingestion

Aquatic Organism

Bioaccumulation Aquatic Prey

Species Ingestion

Terrestrial Prey

Species

DATE PROJECT NO.

FIGURE 3-1

U.S. EPA REGION 6

CERCLA ID NO. TXD099801102

SITE CONCEPTUAL MODEL 

ECOLOGICAL SCREENIING

RISK ASSESSMENT

STATE MARINE SUPERFUND SITE

PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

FEB 03 20074.515.012.2400

Surface Water

Groundwater

(dermal) contact

Groundwater

volatile inhalation

Aquatic Terrestrial
DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE

MAP BASED ON AERIAL IMAGE,

MARCH 2000

AERIAL VIEWPOINT

P.O. BOX 692075-294

HOUSTON, TX 77269

FIGURE 3-2

U.S. EPA REGION 6

CERCLA ID NO. TXD099801102

SAMPLE LOCATION MAP

ECOLOGICAL SCREENIING

RISK ASSESSMENT

STATE MARINE SUPERFUND SITE

PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

FEB 03 20074.515.012.2400 1" = 160'

03-0047 Fig3-2.ai

STEEP GRADE TO WATER

< NO INTERTIDAL ZONE >

ÚÊ

1 2

3

4

5

6 7

8

9

10

12

11

13

14

17

18

15

16

19

26

20

27

24

25

23

21

22

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

38

36

37

CLEARED CANE

< OCT. 2001 >

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

WOODED

PLEASURE ISLET

SITE TRAILER

INLET / LAKE

SABINE

APPROXIMATE EXTENT OF

CLOSED PORT ARTHUR

MUNICIPLE LANDFILL

GULF / LAKE SABINE

PARTIALLY OR FULLY

SUBMERGED BARGES

°

WOODED

LIMITED

INTERTIDAL

ZONES

< LOW BANK 2-3 FT>

PALMER BARGE SITE

FORMER LAUREN REFINING TANK FARM

WASTERWATER IMPOUNDMENTS

MAINTENCE SHED

TAR BURN AREA

WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY

STORAGE TANK AREA

SM117

°

Background

Onshore Zone

Intertidal Zone

Nearshore Zone

Offshore Zone

Monitoring Wells

Fence Line

Sampling Boundary

Site Entrance

Site Photos (See Photo Log)

Source Areas of Investigation

LEGEND

004960
SABINE-NECHES

CHANNEL

S#S# S#

S#

# RF002

RF003

RF005

RF004

RF001

SM135

SM134

SM133

DATE PROJECT NO. SCALE

PORT ARTHUR, JEFFERSON COUNTY, TEXAS SOURCE: AERIAL VIEWPOINT

P.O. BOX 692075-294

HOUSTON, TX 77269

LEGEND

STATE MARINE PROPERTY BOUNDARY

S#

RF002 BACKGROUND SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS

BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE LOCATIONS

FIGURE 3-3

U.S. EPA REGION 6

CERCLA ID NO. TXD099801102

SOIL & SEDIMENT BACKGROUND LOCATIONS

ECOLOGICAL SCREENIING

RISK ASSESSMENT

STATE MARINE SUPERFUND SITE

FEB 03 20074.515.012.2400 1" = 2,000'

03-0047 Fig3-3.ai

SM135

004961
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 3 9 33% 0.390 2.300 0.028 0.110 0.291 0.347 83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 6 9 67% 0.430 0.920 0.016 0.110 0.140 0.143 208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.027 1.800 0.574 0.733 98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.390 2.300 0.048 0.048 0.352 0.327 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.025 2.000 0.687 0.823 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.390 2.300 0.040 0.040 0.351 0.328 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.033 2.000 0.608 0.691 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.041 1.900 0.594 0.685 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.056 3.000 0.849 1.025 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.450 0.450 0.060 2.500 0.828 0.997 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.022 1.100 0.310 0.379 117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.390 2.300 4.900 4.900 1.008 1.499 86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.450 0.450 0.021 0.630 0.202 0.217 218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.060 3.800 1.103 1.307 53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.450 0.450 0.020 0.240 0.115 0.095 

132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 4 9 44% 0.390 0.920 0.032 0.069 0.167 0.136 117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.390 2.300 0.180 0.180 0.393 0.333 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.040 2.500 0.827 0.851 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 5 9 56% 0.400 0.920 0.014 0.170 0.175 0.129 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.039 1.000 0.376 0.410 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 3 9 33% 0.390 0.920 0.070 0.170 0.205 0.110 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.019 1.400 0.420 0.488 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.049 2.800 0.929 0.951 7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 967.000 20600.000 5845.222 5846.763 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 5 9 56% 0.740 0.830 1.000 20.500 4.201 6.676 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2.100 7.400 4.756 1.780 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 106.000 534.000 271.111 126.252 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.110 0.570 0.380 0.166 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 4 9 44% 0.140 0.160 0.250 0.830 0.268 0.280 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 4970.000 11900.000 7217.778 2360.957 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 5.000 27.400 11.967 6.845 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 1.300 6.900 3.911 1.880 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 7.200 98.600 39.556 31.381 57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.110 0.130 0.480 0.480 0.109 0.139 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 6050.000 34000.000 16450.000 8864.818 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 12.600 210.000 80.089 69.000 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 458.000 1730.000 1217.889 474.831 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 105.000 391.000 247.667 97.014 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 4 9 44% 0.060 0.070 0.070 0.160 0.068 0.048 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2.500 53.800 15.222 16.034 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 319.000 1220.000 860.000 326.450 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-1

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Waste Water Impoundment Area)

5/6/2003: 10:57 AM 

004962
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-1

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Waste Water Impoundment Area)

7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.290 2.600 1.007 0.731 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 6 9 67% 221.000 265.000 313.000 723.000 340.333 204.687 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 5.500 26.400 14.800 6.511 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 40.400 438.000 181.144 152.882 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV iA normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/6/2003: 10:57 AM 

004963
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.480 0.013 0.025 0.138 0.109 91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.480 0.033 0.220 0.181 0.084 

106-44-5 4-Methylphenol (p-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.410 0.480 0.023 0.023 0.180 0.089 83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.410 0.410 0.014 0.085 0.105 0.095 208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.410 0.410 0.042 0.350 0.174 0.129 98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.480 0.023 0.120 0.159 0.088 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.019 0.450 0.191 0.195 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.450 0.025 0.051 0.142 0.096 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.100 0.830 0.272 0.314 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.100 0.650 0.248 0.230 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.130 1.100 0.420 0.401 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.410 0.410 0.056 0.240 0.166 0.073 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.061 0.340 0.149 0.113 86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.410 0.410 0.031 0.130 0.122 0.085 218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.098 1.300 0.434 0.493 53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.025 0.100 0.059 0.038 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.480 0.030 0.033 0.143 0.102 

117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.410 0.480 0.033 0.033 0.179 0.083 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.065 2.200 0.575 0.913 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.480 0.057 0.097 0.161 0.079 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.085 0.420 0.177 0.139 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.410 0.480 0.036 0.120 0.161 0.083 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.031 1.100 0.294 0.454 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.130 1.600 0.490 0.627 7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 2590.000 11100.000 6854.000 3050.743 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1.100 5.700 2.680 1.923 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 4.700 10.400 6.760 2.171 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 91.700 292.000 163.920 86.911 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.580 0.980 0.742 0.170 7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.150 0.180 0.490 1.100 0.493 0.434 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 2920.000 10400.000 5848.000 2776.683 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 11.300 25.600 16.820 6.672 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 4.400 9.800 6.780 2.265 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 24.100 299.000 95.020 114.708 57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.120 0.130 0.210 0.210 0.091 0.067 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 14700.000 48400.000 23740.000 13977.231 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 49.000 150.000 88.740 44.895 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 761.000 2850.000 1600.200 823.820 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 205.000 528.000 335.400 125.826 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.070 0.070 0.060 0.980 0.271 0.403 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-2

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Waste Water Treatment Facility)

5/5/2003: 5:05 PM 

004964
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-2

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Waste Water Treatment Facility)

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 13.300 44.100 23.800 13.743 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 779.000 1510.000 1113.000 273.218 7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.540 1.400 0.770 0.770 0.523 0.237 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.640 1.400 1.092 0.346 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 239.000 1510.000 836.200 512.809 7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.860 1.500 2.200 2.200 0.883 0.748 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 8.800 26.200 18.380 7.129 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 131.000 908.000 384.200 309.977 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/5/2003: 5:05 PM 

004965
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.390 0.420 0.040 0.040 0.180 0.062 91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.390 0.420 0.018 0.110 0.137 0.087 106-44-5 4-Methylphenol (p-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.390 0.420 0.046 0.046 0.181 0.060 83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.390 0.420 0.014 0.460 0.186 0.150 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.390 0.410 0.022 0.180 0.097 0.091 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 4 7 57% 0.390 0.420 0.016 0.049 0.101 0.096 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 4 7 57% 0.400 0.420 0.014 1.500 0.318 0.528 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 4 7 57% 0.390 0.410 0.008 0.032 0.094 0.099 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 0.410 0.410 0.034 3.000 0.507 1.101 

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.017 2.700 0.448 0.994 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.030 4.400 0.722 1.623 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 4 7 57% 0.400 0.420 0.059 0.970 0.262 0.319 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 0.410 0.410 0.019 1.800 0.321 0.655 85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.390 0.550 0.030 0.030 0.189 0.075 86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.390 0.420 0.022 0.230 0.155 0.091 

218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.021 2.800 0.467 1.030 53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.390 0.420 0.031 0.330 0.172 0.106 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.390 0.420 0.009 0.180 0.173 0.073 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.021 10.000 1.510 3.744 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.390 0.420 0.470 0.470 0.241 0.101 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.015 1.100 0.197 0.399 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.390 0.420 0.017 0.078 0.132 0.090 87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.980 1.100 0.280 0.280 0.481 0.092 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 0.400 0.400 0.014 3.800 0.625 1.402 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.024 8.400 1.290 3.136 7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 593.000 3490.000 1522.143 1227.808 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 2 3 67% 0.770 0.770 2.100 2.500 1.662 1.124 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 1.500 7.900 3.171 2.512 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 49.600 296.000 208.800 87.647 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.070 0.070 0.080 0.310 0.120 0.100 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.140 0.150 0.480 0.480 0.132 0.153 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 5 7 71% 408.000 409.000 1020.000 8860.000 2769.786 3328.144 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 1.600 126.000 20.843 46.400 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.670 3.100 1.604 0.974 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 4.400 36.700 12.471 11.053 57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.120 0.120 0.120 0.310 0.104 0.093 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 3460.000 14500.000 6971.429 4216.469 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 7.500 558.000 98.843 203.552 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 136.000 865.000 301.286 259.700 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 17.700 379.000 111.257 128.152 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.060 0.060 0.100 0.130 0.054 0.042 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-3

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Current Above Ground Storage Tanks)

5/5/2003: 4:02 PM 

004966
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-3

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Current Above Ground Storage Tanks)

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.810 15.900 4.730 5.185 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 202.000 816.000 381.714 221.411 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.240 0.260 0.260 0.960 0.390 0.301 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 152.000 512.000 257.429 127.363 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 3.400 31.000 9.400 10.186 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 13.200 484.000 108.929 167.986 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/5/2003: 4:02 PM 

004967
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.430 0.790 0.039 0.039 0.222 0.126 208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.430 0.470 0.012 0.110 0.159 0.097 98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.430 0.790 0.015 0.015 0.217 0.135 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.450 0.470 0.015 0.280 0.155 0.127 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.370 0.790 0.009 0.011 0.122 0.170 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.470 0.790 0.029 0.096 0.167 0.148 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.470 0.470 0.018 0.130 0.110 0.085 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.470 0.790 0.051 0.280 0.246 0.125 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.470 0.470 0.049 0.200 0.132 0.081 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.470 0.790 0.027 0.096 0.168 0.148 85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.370 0.790 0.016 0.016 0.207 0.135 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.370 0.470 0.017 0.029 0.097 0.105 218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.470 0.790 0.050 0.170 0.202 0.127 53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.370 0.790 0.030 0.035 0.176 0.152 117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.370 0.790 0.140 0.140 0.234 0.097 206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.470 0.790 0.034 0.240 0.225 0.128 

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.470 0.470 0.027 0.110 0.099 0.084 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.430 0.790 0.027 0.027 0.219 0.131 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.470 0.790 0.028 0.120 0.175 0.144 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.470 0.470 0.034 0.200 0.141 0.094 7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 2330.000 5660.000 3672.000 1224.773 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.720 0.840 0.900 5.800 1.580 2.369 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1.900 19.000 8.440 6.343 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 58.600 256.000 100.720 86.833 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.090 0.600 0.236 0.206 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.140 0.170 0.200 0.200 0.103 0.054 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1980.000 19100.000 7122.000 7612.563 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 5.900 32.500 13.020 10.972 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.960 5.300 3.032 1.716 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 6.300 180.000 46.440 74.850 57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.110 0.130 0.150 0.150 0.080 0.039 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 7650.000 54800.000 21810.000 18835.087 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 9.100 290.000 85.380 116.237 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 569.000 1730.000 929.200 460.346 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 66.100 588.000 185.660 225.498 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 3 5 60% 0.060 0.070 0.060 0.110 0.065 0.035 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 3.500 36.300 12.240 13.698 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 525.000 1650.000 1127.000 400.400 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 4 5 80% 0.230 0.230 0.770 3.300 1.229 1.211 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 179.000 1140.000 561.600 352.020 7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 1 5 20% 1.100 1.300 1.600 1.600 0.800 0.449 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-4

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Maintenance Shed Area)

5/5/2003: 4:20 PM 

004968
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-4

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Maintenance Shed Area)

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 6.700 12.000 10.440 2.159 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 34.200 198.000 95.240 62.893 

Notes:Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/5/2003: 4:20 PM 

004969
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

9

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 2 4 50% 0.440 0.470 0.025 0.042 0.131 0.112 91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine BNA mg/kg 1 4 25% 0.440 0.490 0.810 0.810 0.378 0.289 83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 1 4 25% 0.440 0.490 0.035 0.035 0.184 0.100 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 3 4 75% 0.440 0.440 0.053 0.450 0.211 0.174 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 2 4 50% 0.440 0.490 0.027 2.000 0.623 0.923 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.014 0.390 0.189 0.161 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 3 4 75% 0.440 0.440 0.025 6.300 1.664 3.092 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.066 0.920 0.432 0.357 

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.075 1.200 0.546 0.479 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.150 1.200 0.685 0.447 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.061 0.460 0.255 0.173 

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.056 1.400 0.662 0.618 117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 2 4 50% 0.470 0.500 0.300 4.700 1.371 2.219 85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 2 4 50% 0.440 0.470 0.051 0.520 0.257 0.194 86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 3 4 75% 0.440 0.440 0.081 0.290 0.169 0.104 

218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.098 1.100 0.470 0.436 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.017 0.230 0.108 0.092 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 1 4 25% 0.440 0.490 0.044 0.044 0.186 0.095 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 4 25% 0.440 0.810 0.034 0.034 0.224 0.152 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.097 1.900 0.754 0.789 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 2 4 50% 0.440 0.470 0.019 0.120 0.149 0.100 

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.070 0.740 0.375 0.291 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 2 4 50% 0.440 0.470 0.028 0.052 0.134 0.109 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.051 0.930 0.370 0.386 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.120 1.500 0.725 0.582 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 3510.000 17900.000 8247.500 6534.480 17440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 1.300 6.000 2.750 2.192 

7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 4.300 7.900 6.450 1.729 

7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 89.600 146.000 118.650 25.909 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.320 0.700 0.508 0.164 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 3 4 75% 0.160 0.160 0.370 1.100 0.663 0.519 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 3430.000 66600.000 28350.000 28875.375 67440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 10.100 22.500 13.875 5.817 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 3.300 6.700 4.900 1.402 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 17.400 155.000 64.700 61.645 57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 4 25% 0.130 0.140 0.240 0.240 0.110 0.087 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 12000.000 18200.000 13900.000 2885.596 1

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 38.700 967.000 320.175 433.734 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 873.000 2020.000 1348.250 485.186 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 182.000 413.000 320.750 109.610 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.060 0.310 0.158 0.114 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-5

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Tar Burn Area )

5/5/2003: 5:01 PM 

004970
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

9

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-5

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Tar Burn Area )

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 8.000 26.200 14.600 8.339 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 629.000 1880.000 1176.250 641.322 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 0.800 1.000 0.873 0.095 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 330.000 639.000 476.000 127.009 7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 1 4 25% 1.200 1.400 1.300 1.300 0.813 0.328 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 11.600 17.000 15.225 2.450 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 4 4 100% NA NA 96.300 424.000 326.575 154.265 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less tA normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/5/2003: 5:01 PM 

004971
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.430 4.400 0.018 0.210 0.475 0.765 

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 0.430 0.430 0.024 1.600 0.488 0.697 

106-44-5 4-Methylphenol (p-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.420 4.400 0.110 0.110 0.488 0.756 83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.420 4.400 0.064 0.064 0.481 0.760 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.036 0.910 0.313 0.380 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 0.450 0.450 0.023 0.250 0.147 0.106 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.031 1.100 0.322 0.443 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.450 4.400 0.021 0.097 0.378 0.807 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 4 7 57% 0.430 4.400 0.030 4.200 1.032 1.592 

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 4.400 4.400 0.046 5.100 1.143 1.910 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.063 7.100 1.171 2.620 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 4.400 4.400 0.059 2.100 0.735 0.972 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.470 4.400 0.023 2.500 0.739 1.106 117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 5 7 71% 2.000 4.400 0.094 1.900 0.822 0.899 85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.420 4.400 0.024 0.024 0.586 0.778 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.430 4.400 0.038 0.520 0.522 0.753 

218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 4.400 4.400 0.039 5.400 1.170 2.022 53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.470 4.400 0.022 0.940 0.514 0.811 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.430 4.400 0.017 0.130 0.463 0.770 84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.420 4.400 0.056 0.056 0.589 0.775 117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.430 4.400 0.013 0.013 0.587 0.778 206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.029 7.600 1.164 2.840 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.430 4.400 0.029 0.180 0.472 0.765 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.038 2.200 0.478 0.799 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 6 7 86% 0.430 0.430 0.023 1.400 0.312 0.496 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.017 2.000 0.477 0.779 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.042 7.400 1.273 2.723 7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 3500.000 6780.000 4845.714 1088.927 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.650 0.680 1.400 4.600 1.091 1.598 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 4.100 26.400 8.614 7.877 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 64.500 289.000 128.814 81.424 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 5 7 71% 0.310 0.550 0.120 0.680 0.441 0.249 7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.160 0.340 0.660 1.700 0.605 0.681 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 3000.000 17500.000 8200.000 5578.647 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 6.500 503.000 80.371 186.383 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 3.000 19.100 6.600 5.618 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 10.800 7390.000 1076.014 2784.239 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 8470.000 ######### 31010.000 45590.423 

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 23.500 1030.000 190.743 370.682 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 720.000 1500.000 1157.143 247.232 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-6

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Former Lauren Tank Farm)

5/5/2003: 4:59 PM 

004972
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-6

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Former Lauren Tank Farm)

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 107.000 1020.000 303.000 328.774 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 3 7 43% 0.070 0.070 0.100 5.600 0.856 2.093 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 5.000 411.000 66.943 151.739 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 523.000 3090.000 1411.000 817.635 7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 2 7 29% 0.560 0.580 0.750 4.400 0.941 1.535 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 0.280 6.900 1.483 2.393 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 6 7 86% 255.000 255.000 858.000 1260.000 915.643 377.476 

7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 1 7 14% 0.900 2.700 1.000 1.000 0.662 0.365 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 11.800 16.400 14.414 2.061 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 7 7 100% NA NA 50.400 1480.000 306.629 521.776 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV iA normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/5/2003: 4:59 PM 

004973
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 5 58 9% 0.37 6.6 0.026 0.500 0.37 0.55 91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 15 58 26% 0.37 6.6 0.013 2.000 0.33 0.55 

106-44-5 4-Methylphenol (p-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 2 58 3% 0.36 6.6 0.021 0.220 0.38 0.55 

83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 6 58 10% 0.37 6.6 0.012 10 0.53 1.33 208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 31 58 53% 0.37 6.6 0.011 5 0.37 0.81 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 15 58 26% 0.37 6.6 0.013 0.820 0.34 0.52 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 37 58 64% 0.37 6.6 0.010 13 0.51 1.75 100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 34 58 59% 0.37 4.30 0.007 0.150 0.21 0.42 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 43 58 74% 0.38 6.6 0.012 24.000 0.68 3.15 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 52 58 90% 0.43 0.46 0.015 19.000 0.58 2.50 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 50 58 86% 0.42 0.46 0.017 25.000 0.77 3.28 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 25 58 43% 0.37 1.30 0.051 4.300 0.42 0.66 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 37 58 64% 0.38 6.60 0.019 12.000 0.47 1.61 117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 22 58 38% 0.36 6.60 0.031 3.200 0.71 0.88 

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 8 58 14% 0.36 6.60 0.021 0.260 0.33 0.50 86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 19 58 33% 0.37 6.60 0.012 7.500 0.38 1.04 

218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 46 58 79% 0.41 6.60 0.021 21.000 0.69 2.77 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 31 58 53% 0.37 6.60 0.014 2.200 0.26 0.51 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 7 58 12% 0.37 6.60 0.011 3.800 0.42 0.71 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 3 58 5% 0.36 6.60 0.031 0.440 0.40 0.56 

117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 3 58 5% 0.36 6.60 0.027 0.091 0.39 0.56 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 50 58 86% 0.37 0.45 0.010 62.000 1.33 8.13 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 9 58 16% 0.37 6.60 0.013 8.100 0.49 1.15 

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 46 58 79% 0.37 0.74 0.011 6.900 0.35 0.93 

91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 15 58 26% 0.37 6.60 0.014 6.800 0.40 0.99 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 41 58 71% 0.38 6.60 0.011 53.000 1.18 6.95 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 46 58 79% 0.37 6.60 0.017 40.000 1.02 5.24 7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 841 19600 6255 3772 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 29 51 57% 0.62 0.89 0.800 26.300 2.98 5.10 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 56 58 97% 4.10 5.70 1.700 48.700 6.90 6.31 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 40.700 744.000 191 154 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 55 58 95% 0.07 0.41 0.120 1.200 0.48 0.27 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 29 58 50% 0.10 0.24 0.130 11.500 0.86 1.91 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 577 130000 15240 26383 

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 3 488 24 64 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 0.810 10.300 4.87 2.12 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 6 5480 162 721 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 9 58 16% 0.11 0.73 0.120 0.370 0.10 0.08 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 4420 157000 20233 22129 

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 9 2040 155 333 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 197 4220 1340 743 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-7

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Non-Source Areas)

5/6/2003: 11:13 AM 

004974
CASRN Constituent Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-7

Surface Soil Analytical Results (Non-Source Areas)

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 25 1060 255 169 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 19 58 33% 0.06 0.08 0.080 0.540 0.07 0.09 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 1.400 62.700 14 12 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 278 2330 1196 514 

7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 3 58 5% 0.50 1.40 0.650 0.900 0.51 0.16 

7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 0.240 8.300 1.05 1.29 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 137 2640 606 465 

7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 8 58 14% 0.79 5.90 0.960 2.900 0.74 0.53 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 4 27 15 5 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 58 58 100% NA NA 13 2750 285 509 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV iA normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/6/2003: 11:13 AM 

004975
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 10 95 11% 0.37 6.6 0.013 0.5 0.35 0.49 91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 32 95 34% 0.37 6.6 0.013 2 0.30 0.49 

91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine BNA mg/kg 1 95 1% 0.36 6.6 0.81 0.81 0.39 0.49 

106-44-5 4-Methylphenol (p-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 5 95 5% 0.36 6.6 0.021 0.22 0.36 0.48 

83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 20 95 21% 0.37 6.6 0.012 9.6 0.41 1.07 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene BNA mg/kg 61 95 64% 0.37 6.6 0.011 5 0.34 0.68 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 31 95 33% 0.37 6.6 0.013 2 0.31 0.47 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 69 95 73% 0.37 6.6 0.01 13 0.45 1.40 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 52 95 55% 0.37 4.4 0.007 6.3 0.28 0.74 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 74 95 78% 0.38 6.6 0.012 24 0.63 2.52 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 87 95 92% 0.43 4.4 0.015 19 0.57 2.04 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 85 95 89% 0.42 0.79 0.017 25 0.75 2.70 

191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 55 95 58% 0.37 4.4 0.049 4.3 0.44 0.67 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 69 95 73% 0.38 6.6 0.019 12 0.44 1.31 

117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 30 95 32% 0.36 6.6 0.031 4.9 0.69 0.97 

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 13 95 14% 0.36 6.6 0.016 0.52 0.33 0.46 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 41 95 43% 0.37 6.6 0.012 7.5 0.32 0.85 

218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 80 95 84% 0.41 6.6 0.021 21 0.70 2.28 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 58 95 61% 0.37 6.6 0.014 2.2 0.24 0.46 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 18 95 19% 0.37 6.6 0.009 3.8 0.35 0.60 84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 5 95 5% 0.36 6.6 0.031 0.44 0.38 0.49 117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 7 95 7% 0.36 6.6 0.013 0.18 0.37 0.50 206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 85 95 89% 0.37 0.79 0.01 62 1.16 6.46 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 21 95 22% 0.37 6.6 0.013 8.1 0.39 0.93 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 82 95 86% 0.37 0.74 0.011 6.9 0.33 0.78 91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 32 95 34% 0.37 6.6 0.014 6.8 0.32 0.79 

87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 95 1% 0.91 17 0.28 0.28 0.96 1.26 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 75 95 79% 0.38 6.6 0.011 53 0.88 5.44 

129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 82 95 86% 0.37 6.6 0.017 40 0.96 4.24 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 593 20600 5743 3955 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 49 84 58% 0.62 0.89 0.8 26.3 2.8 4.6 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 93 95 98% 4.1 5.7 1.5 48.7 6.6 5.7 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 40.7 744 186 138 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 88 95 93% 0.07 0.55 0.08 1.2 0.44 0.27 7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 44 95 46% 0.1 0.34 0.13 11.5 0.66 1.53 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 93 95 98% 408 409 577 130000 12673 22021 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-8

Surface Soil Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)

Frequency of Detection

5/6/2003: 11:00 AM 

004976
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-8

Surface Soil Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)

Frequency of Detection

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 1.6 503 25 71 7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 0.67 19.1 4.7 2.6 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 4.4 7390 193 936 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 15 95 16% 0.11 0.73 0.12 0.48 0.102 0.082 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 3460 157000 19693 22055 

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 7.5 2040 146 297 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 136 4220 1231 701 

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 17.7 1060 250 178 

7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 39 95 41% 0.06 0.08 0.06 5.6 0.14 0.58 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 0.81 411 18 42 

7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 202 3090 1111 543 7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 6 95 6% 0.5 1.6 0.65 4.4 0.57 0.43 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 92 95 97% 0.23 0.26 0.24 8.3 1.03 1.24 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 91 95 96% 221 265 137 2640 582 433 

7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 12 95 13% 0.79 5.9 0.96 2.9 0.73 0.47 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 3.4 31 15 5.6 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 95 95 100% NA NA 12.6 2750 261 434 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Surface soils were sampled to characterize the material on the surface of the landfill at depths of 0 to 6 inches.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less than 1.0A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/6/2003: 11:00 AM 

004977
CASRN Constituents

Data 

Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

95

(N

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.42 0.85 0.017 0.017 0.23 0.096 83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/kg 3 11 27% 0.42 0.61 0.02 0.041 0.18 0.10 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 3 11 27% 0.42 0.85 0.014 0.025 0.19 0.13 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/kg 4 11 36% 0.42 0.61 0.011 0.069 0.17 0.12 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 7 11 64% 0.42 0.61 0.013 0.16 0.12 0.10 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 6 11 55% 0.44 0.61 0.019 0.23 0.16 0.12 

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 7 11 64% 0.42 0.61 0.012 0.17 0.13 0.11 

205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 7 11 64% 0.46 0.61 0.019 0.28 0.16 0.12 

191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene BNA mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.42 0.61 0.11 0.11 0.23 0.05 

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 4 11 36% 0.42 0.61 0.022 0.11 0.18 0.11 

117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 3 11 27% 0.42 0.85 0.83 7.4 1.12 2.16 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 2 11 18% 0.42 0.61 0.025 0.05 0.21 0.09 218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 5 11 45% 0.42 0.61 0.044 0.23 0.18 0.10 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene BNA mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.42 0.61 0.039 0.039 0.22 0.07 

132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 2 11 18% 0.42 0.61 0.019 0.026 0.20 0.09 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 2 11 18% 0.42 0.85 0.019 0.024 0.22 0.12 117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.42 0.85 0.2 0.2 0.25 0.07 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 9 11 82% 0.46 0.61 0.016 0.5 0.14 0.15 

86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 2 11 18% 0.42 0.61 0.04 0.042 0.20 0.08 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 6 11 55% 0.44 0.61 0.01 0.12 0.15 0.12 

91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/kg 2 11 18% 0.42 0.85 0.016 0.018 0.22 0.12 86-30-6 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine BNA mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.42 0.85 0.092 0.092 0.24 0.08 

87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 11 9% 1.1 2.1 0.06 0.06 0.59 0.23 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 6 11 55% 0.44 0.61 0.021 0.36 0.18 0.12 

129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 9 11 82% 0.46 0.61 0.024 0.39 0.13 0.13 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 1290 13500 6546 3764 

7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 3 11 27% 0.74 1.4 1.3 9.6 1.57 2.74 

7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 9 11 82% 7.8 9.7 2.2 12.6 6.55 3.31 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 13.6 305 109 104 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 0.11 1.3 0.52 0.45 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 3 11 27% 0.16 0.27 0.99 16.4 2.29 5.11 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 492 32800 6476 9841 

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 2.3 38 15 11 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 0.84 33 8 10 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-9

Subsurface Soil Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)

5/6/2003: 11:11 AM 

004978
CASRN Constituents

Data 

Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

95

(N

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-9

Subsurface Soil Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 2.2 406 67 121 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.12 0.31 0.28 0.28 0.10 0.07 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 5330 64500 25477 20957 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 5 558 132 204 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 485 5570 2225 1661 

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 43.4 481 206 135 

7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 1 11 9% 0.07 0.11 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.01 

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 1.3 36.9 17 13 

7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 422 4050 1910 1229 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 10 11 91% 0.26 0.26 0.27 3.3 1.27 1.12 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 633 5430 2067 1561 

7440-28-0 Thallium METAL mg/kg 1 11 9% 1.2 2.2 1.1 1.1 0.79 0.21 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 6.1 32.8 16 9 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 11 11 100% NA NA 10.6 1550 357 547 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Subsurface soils were sampled to characterize the material below the landfill at depths varying from 3 to 40 feet.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.

5/6/2003: 11:11 AM 

004979
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmet

Average

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 0.006 0.009 0.007 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.027 0.027 0.16 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.024 0.024 0.16 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.063 0.063 0.17 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.03 0.03 0.16 117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.42 0.46 1.3 1.3 0.58 218-01-9 Chrysene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.078 0.078 0.176 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/kg 2 3 67% 0.46 0.46 0.015 0.075 0.11 86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.018 0.018 0.156 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.024 0.024 0.158 85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.026 0.026 0.16 129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.44 0.46 0.04 0.04 0.16 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 3080 6370 4957 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 3.5 6.4 4.7 

7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 107 521 284 7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 0.3 0.55 0.45 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 14700 40000 30633 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 4.4 13.8 8.8 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 2.8 4.3 3.7 7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 7.6 10.7 9.5 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.12 0.13 0.21 0.21 0.11 7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 9110 12000 10330 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 17 22.2 20.17 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 1550 2630 2260 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 179 427 284 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 1 3 33% 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.045 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 5.3 20.2 11 

7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 922 1590 1347 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 0.35 0.46 0.42 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 312 667 462 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 11 18.3 14.2 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 3 3 100% NA NA 37.7 56.5 45 

Notes:

NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported

Table 3-10

Surafce Soil Analytical Results (Background Locations)

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

5/6/2003: 10:59 AM State Marine Soil Summ

004980
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

95% UCL 

(Normal)

(Lo

RFW999-15-0 Acid Volatile Sulfide AVS/SEM mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.4 933 203 306 392 

7440-43-9 Cadmium AVS/SEM mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.08 1.49 0.7 0.6 1.1 7440-50-8 Copper AVS/SEM mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 5 313 88 103 152 7439-92-1 Lead AVS/SEM mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 14.1 942 204 308 394 

7440-02-0 Nickel AVS/SEM mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2.82 85 22 26 39 7440-66-6 Zinc AVS/SEM mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 25.5 594 222 178 332 

108-60-1 2,2'-oxybis (1-Chloropropane) BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.003 0.011 0.014 0.014 0.0037 0.0041 0.0063 

95-95-4 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.025 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

88-06-2 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.025 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

120-83-2 2,4-Dichlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.004 0.017 0.028 0.028 0.006 0.008 0.012 

105-67-9 2,4-Dimethylphenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.026 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

51-28-5 2,4-Dinitrophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.13 0.54 0.71 0.71 0.18 0.21 0.31 

121-14-2 2,4-Dinitrotoluene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.007 0.03 0.043 0.043 0.010 0.013 0.018 

606-20-2 2,6-Dinitrotoluene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.026 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

91-58-7 2-Chloronaphthalene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.003 0.014 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.006 0.009 

95-57-8 2-Chlorophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.007 0.032 0.042 0.042 0.011 0.012 0.018 

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene LPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.009 0.009 0.0034 0.091 0.03 0.03 0.04 

95-48-7 2-Methylphenol (o-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.002 0.007 0.021 0.021 0.004 0.007 0.008 

88-74-4 2-Nitroaniline (o-Nitroaniline) BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.009 0.038 0.057 0.057 0.013 0.017 0.024 88-75-5 2-Nitrophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.005 0.021 0.028 0.028 0.007 0.008 0.012 

91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.031 0.13 0.035 0.035 0.028 0.017 0.038 99-09-2 3-Nitroaniline (m-Nitroaniline) BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.02 0.086 0.11 0.11 0.028 0.033 0.049 

534-52-1 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.033 0.14 0.21 0.21 0.05 0.06 0.09 

101-55-3 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.002 0.01 0.014 0.014 0.0033 0.0043 0.0060 

59-50-7 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.026 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

106-47-8 4-Chloroaniline (p-Nitroaniline) BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.027 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

7005-72-3 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.004 0.018 0.028 0.028 0.006 0.008 0.012 

106-44-5 4-Methylphenol (p-Cresol) BNA mg/kg 2 9 22% 0.007 0.029 0.021 0.044 0.012 0.014 0.020 

100-01-6 4-Nitroaniline (p-Nitroaniline) BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.013 0.053 0.071 0.071 0.018 0.021 0.031 

100-02-7 4-Nitrophenol BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.05 0.21 0.28 0.28 0.07 0.08 0.12 

83-32-9 Acenaphthene LPAH mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.0014 0.098 0.02 0.03 0.04 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene LPAH mg/kg 7 9 78% 0.006 0.012 0.0045 0.035 0.011 0.010 0.017 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 3 9 33% 0.0006 0.002 0.0033 0.043 0.01 0.02 0.02 

120-12-7 Anthracene LPAH mg/kg 6 9 67% 0.002 0.002 0.0052 0.1 0.025 0.032 0.045 

1912-24-9 Atrazine BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.0004 0.001 0.017 0.017 0.002 0.006 0.006 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 4 9 44% 0.025 0.075 0.0085 0.11 0.0288 0.0320 0.0486 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 7 9 78% 0.002 0.002 0.0057 0.13 0.0469 0.0507 0.0783 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.002 0.002 0.024 0.24 0.08 0.08 0.14 

205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.007 0.007 0.019 0.25 0.09 0.09 0.15 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene HPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.004 0.004 0.016 0.16 0.054 0.053 0.086 

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.009 0.009 0.019 0.14 0.056 0.047 0.085 111-91-1 bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.006 0.026 0.035 0.035 0.009 0.010 0.015 

111-44-4 bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.004 0.018 0.028 0.028 0.006 0.008 0.012 

105-60-2 Caprolactam BNA mg/kg 2 9 22% 0.019 0.075 0.028 0.11 0.029 0.032 0.049 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 5 9 56% 0.003 0.006 0.011 0.2 0.0351 0.0644 0.0750 

218-01-9 Chrysene HPAH mg/kg 5 9 56% 0.002 0.004 0.014 0.12 0.045 0.052 0.078 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 3 9 33% 0.004 0.018 0.025 0.029 0.012 0.012 0.019 

132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 5 9 56% 0.004 0.007 0.0051 0.079 0.02 0.03 0.03 

84-66-2 Diethylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.0033 0.008 0.021 0.021 0.0044 0.0063 0.0083 

131-11-3 Dimethylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.002 0.01 0.001 0.001 0.0019 0.0015 0.0028 

117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.003 0.013 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.006 0.009 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.004 0.004 0.009 0.24 0.1 0.1 0.1 

86-73-7 Fluorene LPAH mg/kg 5 9 56% 0.003 0.005 0.012 0.11 0.02 0.04 0.05 

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.004 0.015 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.006 0.009 

87-68-3 Hexachlorobutadiene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.003 0.011 0.014 0.014 0.0037 0.0041 0.0063 77-47-4 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.0009 0.004 0.021 0.021 0.003 0.007 0.007 67-72-1 Hexachloroethane BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.004 0.016 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.006 0.009 

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 6 9 67% 0.006 0.011 0.027 0.18 0.1 0.1 0.1 

78-59-1 Isophorone BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.004 0.016 0.021 0.021 0.005 0.006 0.009 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-11

Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Intertidal Area)

004981
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

95% UCL 

(Normal)

(Lo

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-11

Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Intertidal Area)

91-20-3 Naphthalene LPAH mg/kg 8 9 89% 0.007 0.007 0.014 0.4 0.14 0.14 0.22 

98-95-3 Nitrobenzene BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.005 0.019 0.028 0.028 0.007 0.008 0.012 

621-64-7 N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.007 0.029 0.042 0.042 0.010 0.013 0.018 

86-30-6 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine BNA mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.002 0.009 0.014 0.014 0.0032 0.0042 0.0058 

87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol BNA mg/kg 3 9 33% 0.04 0.12 0.082 0.21 0.07 0.07 0.11 85-01-8 Phenanthrene LPAH mg/kg 7 9 78% 0.002 0.003 0.0049 0.32 0.087 0.121 0.162 

108-95-2 Phenol BNA mg/kg 2 9 22% 0.005 0.02 0.0092 0.028 0.008 0.008 0.013 

129-00-0 Pyrene HPAH mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.0052 0.23 0.09 0.1 0.1 

LMWPAH LMW PAHs LPAH mg/kg 50 63 79% -- -- 0.0454 1.154 0.33 -- -- 

HMWPAH HMW PAHs HPAH mg/kg 70 90 78% -- -- 0.1639 1.719 0.63 -- -- 

TOTALPAH Total PAHs TPAH mg/kg 120 153 78% -- -- 0.2093 2.873 0.96 -- -- 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 273 3530 1711 1054 2365 

7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.2 16.1 4 7 8 

7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 1.8 13.7 7.0 4.2 9.6 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 10.8 83.6 46 24 61 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 2 9 22% 0.089 0.19 0.24 0.33 0.12 0.10 0.18 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.17 4.5 2.3 1.7 3.4 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 250 172000 52122 69062 94941 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2.2 87.2 25 27 42 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 1.4 8.2 4.7 2.5 6.2 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 6.5 124 55 44 83 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 4 9 44% 0.16 0.16 0.27 0.55 0.20 0.17 0.30 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 5300 201000 76288 66172 117314 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 9.5 250 81 75 128 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 189 3620 1148 1043 1794 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 66.3 1500 469 453 750 

7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.016 0.18 0.066 0.053 0.099 

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2.5 42 19 13 27 

7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 76.4 1230 423 380 659 

7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 8 9 89% 1.9 1.9 0.18 5.9 1.3 1.8 2.5 7440-22-4 Silver METAL mg/kg 1 9 11% 0.083 0.092 0.089 0.089 0.049 0.015 0.058 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 584 1560 987 398 1233 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2.5 15.5 9 4 11 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 17.2 1010 292 297 476 

688-73-3 Tributyltin (TBT) ORGANOTINS mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 0.00076 0.0022 0.0017 0.0007 0.0021 

RFW999-14-1 Total Organic Carbon TOC mg/kg 9 9 100% NA NA 2300 36000 15811 11603 23005 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Intertidal surface sediments (0 to 6 inches) were sampled to characterize the constituents in the intertidal zone of the lake adjacent to the SMS site.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported-- = Not appropriate for this group of constituents.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less than 1.0, then the normal 95%UCL A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.LMW PAHs (LPAH) = Sum of all the low molecular weight PAHs: Acenaphthene, Acenaphthylene, Anthracene, Fluorene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene.HMW PAHs (HPAH) = Sum of all the high molecular weight PAHs: Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Chrysene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, Pyrene.Total PAHs (TPAH) = Total sum of all the PAHs (both low and high molecular weight PAHs).

004982
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

RFW999-15-0 Acid Volatile Sulfide AVS/SEM mg/kg 38 41 93% 0.3 0.9 0.001 648 87.470 174.6 

7440-43-9 Cadmium AVS/SEM mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 0.04 0.22 0.114 0.04 7440-50-8 Copper AVS/SEM mg/kg 40 41 98% 0.2 0.2 1.4 15.9 5.280 3.3 

7439-92-1 Lead AVS/SEM mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 4.3 21.7 10.295 4.3 

7440-02-0 Nickel AVS/SEM mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 2.4 13.9 7.396 3 

7440-66-6 Zinc AVS/SEM mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 19.7 69.2 35.602 14.4 

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 5 41 12% 0.025 0.066 0.0012 0.038 0.019 0.0073 

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene LPAH mg/kg 6 41 15% 0.004 0.012 0.0027 0.25 0.010 0.039 91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine BNA mg/kg 3 41 7% 0.031 0.082 0.042 0.075 0.025 0.011 

83-32-9 Acenaphthene LPAH mg/kg 4 41 10% 0.004 0.01 0.0042 0.018 0.003 0.0027 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene LPAH mg/kg 8 41 20% 0.003 0.007 0.0037 0.15 0.009 0.029 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 2 41 5% 0.0006 0.002 0.0057 0.012 0.00 0.002 

120-12-7 Anthracene LPAH mg/kg 15 41 37% 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.15 0.01 0.027 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 2 41 5% 0.025 0.066 0.037 0.038 0.02 0.0068 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 18 41 44% 0.002 0.006 0.006 0.23 0.02 0.039 

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 24 41 59% 0.002 0.005 0.002 0.64 0.04 0.1 

205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 27 41 66% 0.008 0.011 0.007 0.88 0.05 0.14 

191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene HPAH mg/kg 16 41 39% 0.004 0.012 0.005 0.39 0.02 0.061 207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 23 41 56% 0.01 0.024 0.01 0.41 0.03 0.063 

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 15 41 37% 0.005 0.068 0.024 0.05 0.02 0.013 

105-60-2 Caprolactam BNA mg/kg 3 41 7% 0.025 0.066 0.037 0.051 0.02 0.0084 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 10 41 24% 0.003 0.008 0.0052 0.1 0.01 0.018 

218-01-9 Chrysene HPAH mg/kg 19 41 46% 0.002 0.005 0.0083 0.56 0.03 0.088 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 12 41 29% 0.004 0.011 0.004 0.16 0.0113 0.026 

132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/kg 4 41 10% 0.003 0.009 0.0028 0.0099 0.0030 0.0018 

84-66-2 Diethylphthalate BNA mg/kg 4 41 10% 0.004 0.009 0.0019 0.014 0.0032 0.0021 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 10 41 24% 0.0057 0.044 0.0045 0.029 0.0077 0.0059 

117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 5 41 12% 0.003 0.008 0.003 0.007 0.0025 0.0011 206-44-0 Fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 22 41 54% 0.004 0.008 0.0032 0.17 0.0232 0.042 

86-73-7 Fluorene LPAH mg/kg 5 41 12% 0.003 0.007 0.0065 0.033 0.0037 0.0059 

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 19 41 46% 0.006 0.015 0.006 0.45 0.0295 0.071 

91-20-3 Naphthalene LPAH mg/kg 8 41 20% 0.003 0.008 0.0046 0.13 0.0066 0.02 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene LPAH mg/kg 19 41 46% 0.003 0.007 0.0027 0.21 0.0189 0.042 

129-00-0 Pyrene HPAH mg/kg 22 41 54% 0.004 0.008 0.0023 0.98 0.0474 0.16 

LMWPAH LMW PAHs LPAH mg/kg 65 287 23% -- -- 0.026 0.941 0.063 -- 

HMWPAH HMW PAHs HPAH mg/kg 202 410 49% -- -- 0.054 4.9 0.297 -- 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-12

Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Nearshore Area)

004983
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-12

Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Nearshore Area)

TOTALPAH Total PAHs TPAH mg/kg 267 697 38% -- -- 0.080 5.8 0.360 -- 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 408 8820 4395.22 2460 

7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 12 41 29% 0.22 1.1 0.19 0.5 0.24 0.12 

7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 1.6 14 4.56 2.3 

7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 12.2 220 64.35 58 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 32 41 78% 0.055 0.38 0.1 0.88 0.47 0.28 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 12 41 29% 0.024 0.25 0.11 0.78 0.12 0.16 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 271 4080 1250.80 765 

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 2.5 12.3 7.00 2.8 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 1.5 21.2 5.52 3.4 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 1.7 18.4 6.67 3 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 3850 50900 10714.88 7334 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 3.5 19.8 10.98 3.7 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 236 4240 2293.66 1312 

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 35.2 1270 173.64 202 

7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 14 41 34% 0.05 0.19 0.011 0.045 0.04 0.019 

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 2.3 45.7 9.24 6.7 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 127 2400 1325.34 736 

7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 23 41 56% 0.11 0.63 0.13 0.92 0.27 0.23 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 514 5450 2097.71 1321 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 3.4 23 12.88 5.9 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 41 41 100% NA NA 15.3 66 35.75 13 

688-73-3 Tributyltin (TBT) ORGANOTINS mg/kg 15 40 38% 0.00038 0.014 0.00047 0.0063 0.00 0.002 

RFW999-14-1 Total Organic Carbon TOC mg/kg 40 40 100% NA NA 1000 42700 8775.00 7418 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Nearshore surface sediments (0 to 6 inches) were sampled to characterize the constituents on the surface of the lake bottom adjacent to the SMS site.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported-- = Not appropriate for this group of constituents.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less than 1.0, A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.LMW PAHs (LPAH) = Sum of all the low molecular weight PAHs: Acenaphthene, Acenaphthylene, Anthracene, Fluorene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene.HMW PAHs (HPAH) = Sum of all the high molecular weight PAHs: Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Chrysene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Total PAHs (TPAH) = Total sum of all the PAHs (both low and high molecular weight PAHs).

004984
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene LPAH mg/kg 3 16 19% 0.005 0.008 0.0042 0.0062 0.0033 0.0011 

91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine BNA mg/kg 1 16 6% 0.031 0.054 0.042 0.042 0.021 0.006 

83-32-9 Acenaphthene LPAH mg/kg 1 16 6% 0.004 0.006 0.012 0.012 0.0029 0.0025 

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene LPAH mg/kg 4 16 25% 0.003 0.005 0.0047 0.015 0.0036 0.0037 

98-86-2 Acetophenone BNA mg/kg 1 16 6% 0.0006 0.025 0.0054 0.0054 0.0015 0.0032 

120-12-7 Anthracene LPAH mg/kg 5 16 31% 0.002 0.004 0.003 0.029 0.0044 0.0074 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 6 16 38% 0.003 0.004 0.0076 0.084 0.013 0.024 

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 9 16 56% 0.002 0.003 0.002 0.076 0.02 0.03 

205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 9 16 56% 0.008 0.012 0.008 0.11 0.028 0.034 

191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene HPAH mg/kg 9 16 56% 0.005 0.008 0.005 0.049 0.014 0.015 

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 9 16 56% 0.011 0.015 0.011 0.067 0.021 0.019 

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 5 16 31% 0.004 0.039 0.025 0.061 0.016 0.016 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/kg 3 16 19% 0.003 0.005 0.0042 0.039 0.0052 0.0096 

218-01-9 Chrysene HPAH mg/kg 6 16 38% 0.002 0.003 0.007 0.082 0.015 0.026 

53-70-3 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 6 16 38% 0.004 0.007 0.005 0.029 0.008 0.009 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 5 16 31% 0.005 0.014 0.0066 0.02 0.007 0.006 

117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate BNA mg/kg 3 16 19% 0.003 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.0024 0.0009 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 7 16 44% 0.004 0.006 0.0063 0.24 0.03 0.07 

86-73-7 Fluorene LPAH mg/kg 1 16 6% 0.003 0.004 0.0054 0.0054 0.0019 0.0010 

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 8 16 50% 0.007 0.01 0.007 0.066 0.019 0.021 

91-20-3 Naphthalene LPAH mg/kg 3 16 19% 0.003 0.006 0.0036 0.0055 0.0026 0.0011 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene LPAH mg/kg 6 16 38% 0.002 0.004 0.0046 0.11 0.012 0.027 

129-00-0 Pyrene HPAH mg/kg 8 16 50% 0.004 0.006 0.0078 0.2 0.03 0.06 

LMWPAH LMW PAHs PAH mg/kg 23 112 21% -- -- 0.038 0.183 0.030 -- 

HMWPAH HMW PAHs PAH mg/kg 77 160 48% -- -- 0.067 1.0 0.207 -- 

TOTALPAH Total PAHs PAH mg/kg 100 272 37% -- -- 0.104 1.186 0.238 -- 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 408 8290 4276 2519 

7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 4 16 25% 0.22 0.63 0.16 0.46 0.20 0.10 

7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 1.2 9.9 4.3 2.4 

7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 23.5 650 105 150 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 14 16 88% 0.066 0.082 0.051 1.2 0.51 0.33 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 7 16 44% 0.019 0.2 0.095 0.32 0.10 0.09 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 165 7200 1984 1978 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 1.7 11.5 6.4 3.1 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 0.95 8 4.5 2.5 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 2.1 11.3 6.1 3.0 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/kg 1 16 6% 0.15 0.27 0.39 0.39 0.12 0.07 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 3050 15300 8731 3832 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-13

Subsurface Sediment Analytical Results (Nearshore Area)

004985
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-13

Subsurface Sediment Analytical Results (Nearshore Area)

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 4.3 29.9 11 6 7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 273 4080 2140 1255 

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 33.5 764 151 178 

7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 4 16 25% 0.045 0.11 0.014 0.025 0.033 0.013 

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 1.2 12.6 7.0 3.9 

7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 164 2640 1341 782 

7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 11 16 69% 0.1 0.47 0.14 0.57 0.23 0.15 7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 794 3670 2198 1057 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 2.5 21.2 12 6 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 16 16 100% NA NA 17.4 57.1 31 11 

688-73-3 Tributyltin (TBT) ORGANOTINS mg/kg 2 16 13% 0.00041 0.007 0.003 0.0031 0.0011 0.0012 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Nearshore subsurface sediments (down to ~4 feet) were sampled to characterize the constituents below the surface of the lake bottom adjacent to the SMS site.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported-- = Not appropriate for this group of constituents.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less than 1.0, A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.LMW PAHs (LPAH) = Sum of all the low molecular weight PAHs: Acenaphthene, Acenaphthylene, Anthracene, Fluorene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene.HMW PAHs (HPAH) = Sum of all the high molecular weight PAHs: Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Chrysene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-cd)Total PAHs (TPAH) = Total sum of all the PAHs (both low and high molecular weight PAHs).

004986
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

RFW999-15-0 Acid Volatile Sulfide AVS/SEM mg/kg 11 12 92% 0.001 0.001 0.001 140 14 39.9 

7440-43-9 Cadmium AVS/SEM mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 0.04 0.14 0.1 0.026 7440-50-8 Copper AVS/SEM mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 1.6 8.5 4.6 2.4 

7439-92-1 Lead AVS/SEM mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 6.8 14 9.6 2.5 

7440-02-0 Nickel AVS/SEM mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 2.23 44 12.2 10.7 

7440-66-6 Zinc AVS/SEM mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 18.4 46 31.8 8.5 

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.025 0.04 0.039 0.039 0.019 0.0067 91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine BNA mg/kg 4 12 33% 0.035 0.049 0.031 0.049 0.029 0.011 

120-12-7 Anthracene LPAH mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.002 0.003 0.00009 0.00009 0.0013 0.00043 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.025 0.04 0.039 0.039 0.019 0.0067 

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.003 0.003 0.0026 0.0084 0.0025 0.0021 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.002 0.003 0.022 0.054 0.0095 0.017 

205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.009 0.011 0.015 0.034 0.0096 0.0094 

191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene HPAH mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.004 0.007 0.017 0.017 0.0043 0.004 

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.012 0.014 0.017 0.033 0.011 0.0086 

117-81-7 bis(2-Ethylhexyl)phthalate BNA mg/kg 2 12 17% 0.034 0.067 0.05 0.06 0.027 0.014 

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.006 0.038 0.027 0.027 0.011 0.0087 

105-60-2 Caprolactam BNA mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.025 0.04 0.039 0.039 0.019 0.0067 

218-01-9 Chrysene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.003 0.003 0.0022 0.0069 0.0023 0.0017 

84-66-2 Diethylphthalate BNA mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.004 0.006 0.0033 0.0033 0.0027 0.00041 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/kg 2 12 17% 0.0072 0.02 0.006 0.0064 0.0070 0.0019 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.005 0.006 0.003 0.0058 0.003 0.00093 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene LPAH mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.002 0.004 0.000089 0.000089 0.0015 0.00054 

108-95-2 Phenol BNA mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.005 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.0036 0.0014 

129-00-0 Pyrene HPAH mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.005 0.006 0.004 0.017 0.0045 0.0043 

LMWPAH LMW PAHs LPAH mg/kg 2 24 8% -- -- 0.00018 0.00018 0.0028 -- 

HMWPAH HMW PAHs HPAH mg/kg 22 96 23% -- -- 0.0828 0.1761 0.046 -- 

TOTALPAH Total PAHs TPAH mg/kg 24 120 20% -- -- 0.0830 0.1763 0.049 -- 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 562 8150 5779 2476 

7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 2 12 17% 0.33 0.8 0.21 0.27 0.27 0.067 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 2.9 8.9 6.2 1.73 

7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 24.5 115 50 29.8 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 11 12 92% 0.074 0.074 0.2 0.89 0.61 0.26 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 2 12 17% 0.031 0.16 0.2 0.26 0.081 0.073 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 247 5580 1976 1358 

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 2.2 11.3 7.96 2.94 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 1.6 9.7 6.55 2.39 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 3.1 10.7 7.55 2.36 

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-14

Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Offshore Area)

004987
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

Arithmetic 

Average

Standard 

Deviation

Frequency of Detection 

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

Table 3-14

Surface Sediment Analytical Results (Offshore Area)

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 4690 14900 11145 3176 7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 5.4 15.1 10.8 2.73 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 320 4300 3019 1271 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 51.8 745 388 237 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 1 12 8% 0.047 0.089 0.024 0.024 0.035 0.0064 7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 2.8 15.3 10.8 3.95 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 202 2460 1814 737 

7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/kg 3 12 25% 0.13 0.62 0.27 0.59 0.26 0.14 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 705 5200 3155 1232 7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 2.9 18.9 14 4.67 7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 22.4 44.2 33 8 

688-73-3 Tributyltin (TBT) ORGANOTINS mg/kg 5 11 45% 0.0005 0.003 0.0018 0.0059 0.0022 0.00198 

RFW999-14-1 Total Organic Carbon TOC mg/kg 12 12 100% NA NA 1400 10200 6367 2337 

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Offshore surface sediments (0 to 6 inches) were sampled to characterize the constituents on the surface of the lake bottom adjacent to the shipping channel.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported-- = Not appropriate for this group of constituents.The Coefficient of Variation (CV) is calculated as follows: Arithmetic Mean / Std. Deviation; a C.V. < 1 indicates that dataset came from a normally distributed population.The Distribution Test (DT) is calculated using the Wilk Shiparo Test for datasets of 50 or less or the D'Agostino Test for datasets of greater than 50 (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated as a one-sided upper limit calculation on either the mean or the logarithmic mean at a 95% probability level (SiteSTAT 1.0).The 95%UCL was based on the following methodology: if DT equals lognormal then the lognormal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals normal then normal 95%UCL was used, if DT equals unknown or normal/lognormal and CV is less than 1.0A normal DT indicates that the dataset came from a normally distributed population. Likewise, if the DT was lognormal then the dataset came from a lognormally distributed population.LMW PAHs (LPAH) = Sum of all the low molecular weight PAHs: Acenaphthene, Acenaphthylene, Anthracene, Fluorene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Naphthalene, Phenanthrene.HMW PAHs (HPAH) = Sum of all the high molecular weight PAHs: Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene, Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Chrysene, Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, Fluoranthene, Indeno(1,2,3-cdTotal PAHs (TPAH) = Total sum of all the PAHs (both low and high molecular weight PAHs).

004988
CASRN Constituents Units 

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/L 1 6 17% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 2.20E-04 2.20E-04 8.28E-04 2.9891-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/L 4 6 67% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.20E-04 1.20E-03 6.25E-04 3.5483-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mg/L 3 6 50% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 3.50E-04 1.60E-03 8.58E-04 4.34120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mg/L 3 6 50% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 1.60E-04 4.30E-04 6.37E-04 3.55100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 9.10E-04 1.60E-03 1.05E-03 2.6985-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 2.40E-03 2.40E-03 1.80E-03 2.50E-03 1.52E-03 5.3886-74-8 Carbazole BNA mg/L 1 6 17% 6.00E-03 6.00E-03 2.70E-03 2.70E-03 2.95E-03 1.22132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mg/L 3 6 50% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 6.90E-05 9.00E-04 5.90E-04 2.8984-66-2 Diethylphthalate BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.50E-04 5.60E-04 6.02E-04 1.81

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 5.40E-04 2.10E-03 5.30E-03 1.70E-02 4.08E-03 6.61206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mg/L 3 6 50% 2.40E-03 2.40E-03 7.30E-05 5.70E-04 7.36E-04 5.3586-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/L 3 6 50% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.70E-04 1.40E-03 8.12E-04 3.9091-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 4.10E-04 1.10E-03 8.85E-04 2.4086-30-6 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine BNA mg/L 1 6 17% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.00E-04 2.00E-04 6.17E-04 2.0487-86-5 Pentachlorophenol BNA mg/L 1 6 17% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 4.00E-03 4.00E-03 1.25E-03 1.3585-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mg/L 4 6 67% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 1.60E-04 2.40E-03 8.53E-04 8.09108-95-2 Phenol BNA mg/L 5 6 83% 2.00E-04 2.00E-04 3.60E-04 3.00E-03 1.28E-03 1.02129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.90E-04 1.90E-03 1.63E-03 6.57

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 7.75E-02 2.63E+01 6.92E+00 1.027440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/L 5 6 83% 1.00E-02 1.00E-02 1.00E-02 1.00E-02 9.17E-03 2.047440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.70E-03 8.41E-02 3.28E-02 3.687440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 1.91E-01 4.40E+00 1.72E+00 1.807440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.50E-04 5.00E-03 3.47E-03 2.377440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/L 4 6 67% 5.00E-03 5.00E-03 2.50E-04 4.80E-04 1.06E-03 1.12

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 5.32E+01 3.57E+02 2.35E+02 1.07

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 9.70E-04 2.82E-02 9.18E-03 9.927440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 3.80E-03 1.49E-02 6.23E-03 4.297440-50-8 Copper METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 3.70E-03 2.50E-02 9.37E-03 8.3957-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mg/L 3 6 50% 2.50E-03 2.50E-03 6.50E-03 2.30E-02 9.08E-03 1.03

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 6.69E-01 5.92E+01 2.12E+01 2.71

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 8.90E-04 2.04E-02 7.10E-03 7.147439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 5.07E+01 4.07E+02 1.70E+02 1.567439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 7.87E-02 2.44E+00 1.31E+00 8.387440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 1.37E-02 3.33E-02 2.36E-02 8.227440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 3.76E+01 1.71E+02 8.96E+01 4.507782-49-2 Selenium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.50E-03 1.42E-02 9.37E-03 5.077440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.97E+02 2.97E+03 1.35E+03 1.157440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 3.50E-03 4.62E-02 1.87E-02 1.607440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 1.84E-02 1.45E-01 7.39E-02 5.66683-18-1 Dibutyltin ORGANOTINS mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 

1118-46-3 Monobutyltin ORGANOTINS mg/L 5 5 100% NA NA 3.10E-05 3.10E-05 3.10E-05 1461-25-2 Tetrabutyltin ORGANOTINS mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 5.00E-05 5.00E-05 5.00E-05 688-73-3 Tributyltin (as TBT) ORGANOTINS mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 71-55-6 1,1,1-Trichloroethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 3.1079-34-5 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.3379-00-5 1,1,2-Trichloroethane VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 2.00E-03 2.00E-03 2.00E-03 2.00E-03 1.33E-03 5.1675-34-3 1,1-Dichloroethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 3.1075-35-4 1,1-Dichloroethene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 3.10120-82-1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 6.00E-04 1.00E-03 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 4.33E-04 1.5196-12-8 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 7.00E-04 1.00E-03 7.00E-04 7.00E-04 4.92E-04 1.72106-93-4 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 3.75E-04 1.37

Table 3-15

Groundwater Analytical Results (All Upland Areas)

Arithmetic 

Average

Stan

Data Group Frequency of Detection Dev

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

5/5/2003: 10:14 AM 

004989
95-50-1 1,2-Dichlorobenzene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 3.75E-04 1.37

107-06-2 1,2-Dichloroethane VOA mg/L 5 6 83% 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 6.00E-04 1.00E-03 6.50E-04 1.7678-87-5 1,2-Dichloropropane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 7.00E-04 7.00E-04 7.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.75E-04 2.70541-73-1 1,3-Dichlorobenzene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.58E-04 1.39106-46-7 1,4-Dichlorobenzene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 1.00E-02 2.08E-03 3.89591-78-6 2-Hexanone VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 6.00E-04 1.00E-03 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 4.33E-04 1.51108-10-1 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 3.75E-04 1.3767-64-1 Acetone VOA mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.00E-03 5.00E-02 2.55E-02 2.1571-43-2 Benzene VOA mg/L 4 6 67% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-03 1.03E-03 1.4875-27-4 Bromodichloromethane VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.3375-25-2 Bromoform VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.58E-04 1.3974-83-9 Bromomethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.00E-03 5.08E-04 7.3475-15-0 Carbon Disulfide VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 8.00E-04 1.00E-03 6.00E-03 1.47E-03 2.2556-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 6.00E-04 1.00E-03 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 4.33E-04 1.51108-90-7 Chlorobenzene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 8.00E-04 2.60E-02 4.95E-03 1.0375-00-3 Chloroethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 2.00E-03 6.25E-04 6.8567-66-3 Chloroform VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.3374-87-3 Chloromethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 2.00E-03 5.67E-04 7.09156-59-2 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 3.1010061-01-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.58E-04 1.39124-48-1 Dibromochloromethane VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.331868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane VOA mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 1.05E-02 4.80E-02 1.79E-02 1.4875-71-8 Dichlorodifluoromethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.58E-04 2.92100-41-4 Ethylbenzene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 2.00E-03 6.17E-04 6.8898-82-8 Isopropylbenzene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.3378-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) VOA mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 2.00E-03 4.00E-03 2.67E-03 8.1675-09-2 Methylene Chloride VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 3.10100-42-5 Styrene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.58E-04 1.39127-18-4 Tetrachloroethene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.33108-88-3 Toluene VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.00E-04 5.00E-04 3.08E-04 1.59156-60-5 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.58E-04 2.92

10061-02-6 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.42E-04 3.3179-01-6 Trichloroethylene (Trichloroethene) VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.17E-04 2.79

75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.58E-04 2.9275-01-4 Vinyl Chloride VOA mg/L 3 6 50% 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 2.00E-03 6.83E-04 6.621330-20-7 Xylenes, Total VOA mg/L 2 6 33% 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 6.67E-04 2.58

Notes:

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI).Constituents include a statistical summary of data from all monitoring wells and each well individually.NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.ND - Constituent was not detected at this location.

--- - Indicates that analyte was not detected in this monitoring well.* - Standard deviation was negligible or equal to zero.

5/5/2003: 10:14 AM 

004990
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units

A

RFW999-15-0 Acid Volatile Sulfide AVS/SEM mg/kg 1 5 20% 0.3 0.5 8.6 8.6 

7440-43-9 Cadmium AVS/SEM mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.02 0.05 

7440-50-8 Copper AVS/SEM mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.4 1.1 

7439-92-1 Lead AVS/SEM mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1.2 2.5 

7440-02-0 Nickel AVS/SEM mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.83 85.2 

7440-66-6 Zinc AVS/SEM mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 3.15 8.43 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 312 594 7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.27 0.38 7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.47 0.93 7440-39-3 Barium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 3.2 6.1 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.075 0.096 0.054 0.062 7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.037 0.07 7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 66.3 176 7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.91 1.3 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.57 1.2 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1210 2250 

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1.5 2.3 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 133 275 7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 21.9 45.6 7439-97-6 Mercury METAL mg/kg 2 5 40% 0.0033 0.0038 0.004 0.005 

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.54 1.1 7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 81.6 165 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 329 442 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 1.8 2.8 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 3.3 6.5 

688-73-3 Tributyltin (as TBT) ORGANOTINS mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 0.00076 0.00081 

RFW999-14-1 Total Organic Carbon TOC mg/kg 5 5 100% NA NA 600 1500 

Notes:

NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported.-- = Not applicable or appropriate for this constitutent.Background surface sediments (0 to 6 inches) were sampled during the WESTON 2001 RI at five reference area locations adjacent to Sydnes Island (RFW01, RFW02, RFW03, RFW04, RFW05).

Table 3-16

Background Sediment Analytical Results

Frequency of Detection

Range of Detection 

Limits

Range of Detected 

Concentrations

004991
Site-specific background values were calculated using the arithmetic mean for constituents with 100% frequency of detection or the maximum detected concentration for constituents with 

004992
Table 3-17 

Groundwater Analytical Results (All Upland Areas) 

Range of Detection Range of Detected Arithmetic Standard Station SM061 StationSM068 Station SM116 

CASRN Constituents Data Group Units Frequency of Detection Limits Concentrations Average Deviation SM061A SM061B SM068A SM068B MW116A MWl16B 

22-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl BNA mg/L 1 6 17% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 2.20E-04 2.20E-04 8.28E-04 2.98E-04 ND NO ND ND ND 2.20E-04 

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene BNA mg/L 4 6 67% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.20E-04 1.20E-03 6.25E-04 3. 54E-04 NO 2.20E-04 2.80E-04 1.20E-03 NO 6.50E-04 

83-32-9 Acenaphthene BNA mglL 3 6 50% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 3.50E-04 1.60E-03 8.58E-04 4.34E-04 NO NO 3.50E-04 1.10E-03 ND 1.60E-03 

120-12-7 Anthracene BNA mgIL 3 6 50% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 1.60E-04 4.30E-04 6.37E-04 3.55E-04 ND ND 1.60E-04 4.30E-04 ND 3.80E-04 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde BNA mgIL 2 6 33% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 9.IOE-04 1.60E-03 1.05E-03 2.69E-04 NO l.60E-03 NO 9.1OE-04 NO NO 

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 2.40E-03 2.40E-03 1.80E-03 2.50E-03 1.52E-03 5.38E-04 2.50E-03 1.80E-03 ND NO NO NO 

86-74-8 Carbazole BNA mgIL 1 6 17% 6.ooE-03 6.ooE-03 2.70E-03 2.70E-03 2.95E-03 1.22E-04 NO ND NO NO NO 2.70E-03 

132-64-9 Dibenzofuran BNA mgIL 3 6 50% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 6.90E-05 9.ooE-04 5.90E-04 2.89E-04 ND ND 6.90E-05 4.70E-04 NO 9.ooE-04 

84-66-2 Diethylphthalate BNA mglL 2 6 33% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.50E-04 5.60E-04 6.02E-04 1.81E-04 5.60E-04 NO ND NO 2.50E-04 NO 

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate BNA mg/L 2 6 33% 5.40E-04 2.1OE-03 5.30E-03 1.70E-02 4.08E-03 6.61E-03 1.70E-02 5.30E-03 NO NO NO ND 

206-44-0 Fluoranthene BNA mgIL 3 6 50% 2.40E-03 2.40E-03 nOE-05 5.70E-04 7.36E-04 5.35E-04 NO 7.30E-05 ND 1.70E-04 NO 5.70E-04 

86-73-7 Fluorene BNA mg/l 3 6 50% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.70E-04 1.40E-03 8. 12E-04 3.90E-04 NO ND 2.70E-04 I.1OE-03 ND 1.40E-03 

91-20-3 Naphthalene BNA mgIL 2 6 33% 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 4.1OE-04 1.10E-03 8.85E-04 2.40E-04 NO 4.IOE-04 NO NO ND 1.10E-03 

86-30-6 N-Nitrosodiphenylarnine BNA mglL 1 6 17% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 2.00E-04 2.ooE-04 6.17E-04 2.04E-04 NO ND NO NO NO 2.ooE-04 

87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol BNA mg/L 1 6 17% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 4.00E-03 4.ooE-03 l.25E-03 1.35E-03 NO 4.ooE-03 NO NO NO NO 

85-01-8 Phenanthrene BNA mgIL 4 6 67% 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 1.60E-04 2.40E-03 8.53E-04 8.09E-04 NO NO 2.60E-04 9.ooE-04 1.60E-04 2.40E-03 

108-95-2 Phenol BNA mgIL 5 6 83% 2.ooE-04 2.ooE-04 3.60E-04 3.ooE-03 1.28E-03 1.02E-03 1.40E-03 1.40E-03 3.60E-04 3.ooE-03 1.40E-03 NO 

129-00-0 Pyrene BNA mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 2.90E-04 1.90E-03 1.63E-03 6.57E-04 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 1.90E-03 2.90E-04 

7429-90-5 Aluminum METAL mglL 6 6 100% NA NA 7.75E-02 2.63E+Ol 6. 92E+OO 1.02E+01 2.63E+Ol 7.75E-02 8.71E+00 3.08E-01 6.ooE+00 1.15E-Ol 

7440-36-0 Antimony METAL mgIL 5 6 83% 1.ooE-02 1.ooE-02 1.00E-02 l.ooE-02 9.17E-03 2.04E-03 ND l.ooE-02 1.00E-02 1.ooE-02 1.00E-02 1.00E-02 

7440-38-2 Arsenic METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 2.70E-03 8.41E-02 3.28E-02 3.68E-02 8.41E-02 5.ooE-03 1.49E-02 1.45E-02 7.53E-02 2.70E-03 

7440-39-3 Barium METAL mglL 6 6 100% NA NA 1.91E-01 4.40E+00 1.72E+oo 1.80E+00 3. 59E+00 5.61E-01 8.99E-01 1.91E-01 4.40E+00 6.59E-Ol 

7440-41-7 Beryllium METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 2.50E-04 5.00E-03 3.47E-03 2.37E-03 5.80E-04 5.00E-03 2.50E-04 5.ooE-03 5.00E-03 5.ooE-03 

7440-43-9 Cadmium METAL mg/L 4 6 67% 5.ooE-03 5.ooE-03 2.50E-04 4.80E-04 1.06E-03 1.12E-03 3.10E-04 2.90E-04 4.80E-04 2.50E-04 ND NO 

7440-70-2 Calcium METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 5.32E+01 3.57E+02 2.35E+02 1.07E+02 2.98E+02 2.03E+02 2. 94E+02 5.32E+Ol 3.57E+02 2.06E+02 

7440-47-3 Chromium METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 9.70E-04 2.82E-02 9.18E-03 9.92E-03 2.82E-02 1.60E-03 9.30E-03 7.40E-03 7.60E-03 9.70E-04 

7440-48-4 Cobalt METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 3.80E-03 1.49E-02 6.23E-03 4.29E-03 1.49E-02 4.40E-03 3.90E-03 5.1OE-03 3.80E-03 5.30E-03 

7440-50-8 Copper METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 3.70E-03 2.50E-02 9.37E-03 8.39E-03 1.30E-02 2.50E-02 5.60E-03 3.70E-03 4.50E-03 4.40E-03 

57-12-5 Cyanide, Total METAL mgIL 3 6 50% 2.50E-03 2.50E-03 6.)OE-03 2.30E-02 9.08E-03 1.03E-02 NO 2.30E-02 6.50E-03 2. 12E-02 NO NO 

7439-89-6 Iron METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 6.69E-Ol 5.92E+Ol 2.12E+Ol 2.7lE+Ol 5.92E+Ol 1.45E+00 1.15E+Ol 6.69E-Ol 5.23E+01 2.27E+00 

7439-92-1 Lead METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 8.90E-04 2.04E-02 7.1OE-03 7.14E-03 2.04E-02 8.90E-04 6.90E-03 8.50E-03 4.20E-03 1.70E-03 

7439-95-4 Magnesium METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 5.07E+Ol 4.07E+02 1.70E+02 1.56E+02 3.28E+02 8.43E+OI 9.81E+01 5.07E+01 4.07E+02 5.48E+01 

7439-96-5 Manganese METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 7.87E-02 2.44E+00 1.31E+00 8.38E-Ol 2.44E+00 2.03E+00 9.52E-Ol 7.87E-02 1.04E+00 1.31E+00 

7440-02-0 Nickel METAL mglL 6 6 100% NA NA 1.37E-02 3.33E-02 2.36E-02 8.22E-03 2.67E-02 3.33E-02 3. 14E-02 2.14E-02 1.37E-02 1. 52E-02 

7440-09-7 Potassium METAL mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 3.76E+Ol 1.71E+02 8.96E+01 4.50E+01 7.22E+01 8.31E+01 1.02E+02 I.71E+02 7.19E+01 3.76E+Ol 

7782-49-2 Selenium METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 2.50E-03 1.42E-02 9.37E-03 5.07E-03 1. 24E-02 3.50E-03 1.42E-02 1.29E-02 1.07E-02 2.50E-03 

7440-23-5 Sodium METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 2.97E+02 2.97E+03 1.35E+03 1.15E+03 2.47E+03 3.40E+02 1.45E+03 5.84E+02 2.97E+03 2.97E+02 

7440-62-2 Vanadium METAL mglL 6 6 100% NA NA 3.50E-03 4.62E-02 1.87E-02 1.60E-02 4.62E-02 3.50E-03 1.91E-02 2.53E-02 1.46E-02 3.60E-03 

7440-66-6 Zinc METAL mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 1.84E-02 1.45E-01 7. 39E-02 5.66E-02 1.45E-01 2.54E-02 1.40E-01 7.45E-02 4.01E-02 1. 84E-02 

683-18-1 Dibutyltin ORGANOTINS mglL 6 6 100% NA NA 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 * 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 3.80E-05 

1118-46-3 Monobutyltin ORGANOTJNS mg/L 5 5 100% NA NA 3.IOE-05 3.1OE-05 3.1OE-05 * 3.10E-05 3.1OE-05 3.1OE-05 3.10E-05 ND 3.10E-05 

1461-25-2 Tetrabutyltin ORGANOTINS mgIL 6 6 100% NA NA 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 * 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 5.ooE-05 

1461-22-9 Tributyltin ORGANOTINS mg/L 6 6 100% NA NA 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 * 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 4.40E-05 

iRF'W999-13-1 Solids, Total Dissolved (TDS) TDS mglL 6 6 100% NA NA 1.70E+03 1.10E+04 5. 39E+03 4.ooE+03 9.32E+03 2.04E+03 5.72E+03 2.54E+03 1.10E+04 1.70E+03 

71-55-6 1,1,1-Trichloroethane VOA mgIL 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 l.ooE-03 4.ooE-04 3.10E-04 l.ooE-03 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 NO ND ND 

79-34-5 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane VOA mgIL 2 6 33% 4.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 3.17E-04 1.33E-04 ND 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 NO ND NO 

79-00-5 1,1,2-Trichloroethane VOA mgIL 2 6 33% 2.ooE-03 2.ooE-03 2.00E-03 2.ooE-03 1.33E-03 5. 16E-04 ND 2.ooE-03 2.ooE-03 ND ND NO 

75-34-3 1,1-0ichloroethane VOA mgIL 3 6 50% 4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 I.OOE-03 4.00E-04 3.IOE-04 1.00E-03 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 NO NO NO 

75-35-4 1,I-Dichloroethene VOA mglL 3 6 50% 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 l.ooE-03 4.00E-04 3.IOE-04 l.ooE-03 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 ND NO ND 

120-82-1 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene VOA mgIL 2 6 33% 6.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 6.00E-04 6.ooE-04 4.33E-04 1.5lE-04 NO 6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 NO ND NO 

96-12-8 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane VOA mgIL 2 6 33% 7.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 7.00E-04 7.00E-04 4.92E-04 1.72E-04 ND 7.ooE-04 7.ooE-04 ND NO NO 

106-93-4 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) VOA mgIL 2 6 33% 5.ooE-04 1.ooE-03 5.00E-04 5.ooE-04 3.75E-04 1.37E-04 NO 5.ooE-04 5.ooE-04 NO ND ND 

004993
CASRN Constituents Data Group Units Frequency of Detection 

95-50-1 1,2-0ichlorobenzene VOA mgIL 

107-06-2 1,2-Oichloroethane VOA mgIL 

78-87-5 1,2-Dichloropropane VOA mgIL 

541-73-1 1,3-0ichlorobenzene VOA mgIL 

106-46-7 1 A-Dichlorobenzene VOA mgIL 

591-78-6 2-Hexanone VOA mg/L 

108-10-1 4-Methyl-2-p~ntanone (MIBK) VOA mgIL 

67-64-1 Acetone VOA mgIL 

71-43-2 Benzene VOA mgIL 

75-27-4 Bromodichloromethane VOA mgIL 

75-25-2 Bromoform VOA mgIL 

74-83-9 Bromomethane VOA mgIL 

75-15-0 Carbon Disulfide VOA mglL 

56-23-5 Carbon Tetrachloride VOA mgIL 

108-90-7 Chlorobenzene VOA mg/L 

75-00-3 Chloroethane VOA mgIL 

67-66-3 Chloroform VOA mgIL 

74-87-3 Chloromethane VOA mg/L 

156-59-2 cis-l,2-Dichloroethene VOA mg/L 

10061-01-5 cis-l,3-0ichloropropene VOA mg/L 

124-48-1 Oibromochloromethane VOA mglL 

1868-53-7 Dibromofluoromethane VOA mgIL 

75-71-8 Oichlorodifluoromethane VOA mglL 

100-41-4 Ethylbenzene VOA mgIL 

g8-82-8 Isopropylbenzene VOA mgIL 

78-93-3 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) VOA m~ 

75-09-2 Methylene Chloride VOA mgiL 

100-42-5 Styrene VOA mgIL 

127-18-4 Tetrachloroethene VOA mg/L 

108-88-3 Toluene VOA mgiL 

156-60-5 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene VOA mgIL 

10061-02-6 trans-l,3-Dichloropropene VOA mgIL 

79-01-6 Trichloroethylene (Trichloroethene) VOA m~ 

75-69-4 Trichlorofluoromethane VOA mgIL 

75-01-4 Vinyl Chloride VOA mgIL 

1330-20-7 Xylenes, Total VOA mgIL 

Notes: 

Constituents include sample results from the WESTON 2001 Remedial Investigation (RI). 

Constituents include a statistical summary of data from all monitOring wells and each well individually. 

NA - Constituent was detected at a frequency of 100%; no detection limit data was reported. 

ND - Constituent was not detected at this location. 

--- - Indicates that analyte was not detected in this monitoring well. 

* -Standard deviation was negligible or equal to zero. 

2 6 33% 

5 6 83% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

2 6 33% 

6 6 100% 

4 6 67% 

2 6 33% 

2 6 33% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

2 6 33% 

6 6 100% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

6 6 100% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

2 6 33% 

2 6 33% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

3 6 50% 

2 6 33% 

Table 3-17 

Groundwater Analytical Results (All Upland Areas) 

Range of Detection Range of Detected Arithmetic Standard Station SM061 Station SM068 Station SM116 

Limits Concentrations Average Deviation SM061A SM06lB SM068A SM068B MW116A MWl16B 

5.00E-04 I.00E-03 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 3.75E-04 1.37E-04 NO 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 NO ND NO 

1.00E-03 I.OOE-03 6.00E-04 I.OOE-03 6.50E-04 1.76E-04 ND 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 6.00E-04 1.00E-03 

7.00E-04 7.00E-04 7.00E-04 I.00E-03 5.75E-04 2.70E-04 I.00E-03 7.00E-04 7.00E-04 NO NO NO 

3.00E-04 1.00E-03 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.58E-04 1.39E-04 ND 3.00E-04 3.ooE-04 NO NO NO 

5.00E-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 1.ooE-02 2.08E-03 3.89E-03 ND 5.00E-04 1.ooE-03 I.00E-02 ND ND 

6.ooE-04 1.00E-03 6.ooE-04 6.00E-04 4.33E-04 1.5IE-04 NO 6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 ND ND ND 

5.ooE-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 5.ooE-04 3.75E-04 1.37E-04 ND 5.00E-04 5.ooE-04 ND ND NO 

NA NA 2.00E-03 5.00E-02 2.55E-02 2. 15E-02 2.70E-02 5.ooE-02 5.ooE-02 2.20E-02 2.ooE-03 2.ooE-03 

4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 4.ooE-03 1.03E-03 1.48E-03 l.ooE-03 4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-03 ND ND 

4.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 3.17E-04 1.33E-04 ND 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 NO NO NO 

3.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 3.00E-04 3.ooE-04 2.58E-04 1.39E-04 ND 3.ooE-04 3.ooE-04 ND ND NO 

3.ooE-04 3.ooE-04 3.00E-04 2.ooE-03 5.08E-04 7.34E-04 2.ooE-03 3.00E-04 3.ooE-04 ND ND NO 

4.00E-04 8.00E-04 1'()()E-03 6.ooE-03 1.47E-03 2.25E-03 1.00E-03 1.ooE-03 6.ooE-03 ND ND NO 

6.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 6'()()E-04 6.ooE-04 4.33E-04 1.51E-04 ND 6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 ND ND ND 

4.ooE-04 1.00E-03 8.00E-04 2.60E-02 4.95E-03 1.03E-02 ND 8.ooE-04 2.ooE-03 2.60E-02 ND ND 

5.ooE-04 5.ooE-04 5.00E-04 2.ooE-03 6.25E-04 6.85E-04 2.ooE-03 5.ooE-04 5.00E-04 ND ND ND 

4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.33E-04 ND 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 NO NO NO 

4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 2.00E-03 5.67E-04 7.09E-04 2.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 NO ND NO 

4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 I.00E-03 4.ooE-04 3.10E-04 l.ooE-03 4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 NO ND ND 

3.00E-04 l.ooE-03 3.00E-04 3.00E-04 2.58E-04 1.39E-04 ND 3.ooE-04 3.00E-04 NO NO ND 

4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3. 17E-04 1.33E-04 NO 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 NO ND ND 

NA NA 1.05E-02 4.80E-02 1.79E-02 1.48E-02 1.36E-02 1.12E-02 4.80E-02 1.05E-02 1.25E-02 1.16E-02 

5.ooE-04 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 l.ooE-03 4.58E-04 2.92E-04 1.00E-03 5.ooE-04 5.00E-04 NO NO NO 

4.ooE-04 1.ooE-03 4.00E-04 2.ooE-03 6. 17E-04 6.88E-04 ND 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 NO 2.00E-03 NO 

4.00E-04 I.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 3.17E-04 1.33E-04 NO 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 NO NO NO 

NA NA 2.00E-03 4.00E-03 2.67E-03 8. 16E-04 2.00E-03 3.00E-03 4.ooE-03 2.ooE-03 3.00E-03 2.ooE-03 

4.00E-04 4.ooE-04 4.00E-04 1.ooE-03 4.ooE-04 3.lOE-04 1.00E-03 4.ooE-04 4.ooE-04 ND ND NO 

3.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 3.00E-04 3.ooE-04 2.58E-04 1.39E-04 ND 3.ooE-04 3.00E-04 NO ND NO 

4.00E-04 1.00E-03 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 3.17E-04 1.33E-04 NO 4.00E-04 4.00E-04 NO NO NO 

3.ooE-04 l.ooE-03 3.00E-04 5.ooE-04 3.08E-04 1.59E-04 ND 5.ooE-04 3.00E-04 NO ND ND 

5.ooE-04 5.00E-04 5.ooE-04 1.ooE-03 4.58E-04 2.92E-04 1.00E-03 5.00E-04 5.00E-04 NO NO NO 

3.00E-04 3.ooE-04 3.00E-04 I.00E-03 3.42E-04 3.31E-04 l.ooE-03 3.00E-04 3.ooE-04 ND ND NO 

6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 6.00E-04 1.ooE-03 5. 17E-04 2.79E-04 l.ooE-03 6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 NO NO NO 

5.ooE-04 5.ooE-04 5.ooE-04 1.ooE-03 4.58E-04 2.92E-04 l.ooE-03 5.00E-04 5.ooE-04 ND NO NO 

6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 6.00E-04 2.ooE-03 6.83E-04 6.62E-04 2.ooE-03 6.ooE-04 6.ooE-04 NO ND NO 

1.ooE-03 1.ooE-03 l.ooE-03 1.ooE-03 6.67E-04 2.58E-04 NO l.ooE-03 I.OOE-03 NO NO NO 

004994
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-1

4. DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

An important step in ecological risk assessment is screening the chemicals occurring on a site for 

constituents of potential ecological concern (COPEC). Screening may be accomplished by 

comparing reported concentrations in media to a set of toxicological benchmarks. In general, 

ecological screening benchmark values (SBVs) are chemical concentrations that correspond to 

fixed levels of risk. If a chemical concentration exceeds the SBV, more analysis is needed to 

determine the hazards posed by that chemical and it is labeled a COPEC. If, however, the 

chemical concentration or its detection limit falls below the SBV, the chemical may be ignored 

during further study unless public concern or ancillary evidence suggests that it should be 

retained. 

This section presents specific information on how the screening levels used in this SRA were 

calculated. SBVs should generally be consistent with the exposure pathways and exposure 

routes as outlined in the Site Conceptual Model for ecological receptors and exposure as 

presented in Figure 3-1. Screening benchmarks are summarized in the sections below according 

to the media for which they were developed and are presented in detail in Tables 4-1 through 4-

8. 

4.1 SOIL 

No regulatory criteria or standards have been established for soil. Soil chemical concentrations 

are compared to soil SBVs to assess the toxicity of COPECs to terrestrial plants and 

soil-dwelling organisms through direct contact and to wildlife through bioaccumulation through 

the terrestrial food chain. Multiple SBVs are presented for soil to help portray the entire 

spectrum of concentrations that have been associated with various probabilities of adverse 

biological effects. SBVs for soil are presented in Table 4-1. The ecological SBV that was 

selected for soil is the lowest of all the values presented. These conservative SBVs are then 

compared to Texas-specific median background concentrations [Figure 30 TAC 350.51(m)] 

since it is safe to assume that a benchmark below background is a poor measure of ecological 

risk (TCEQ, 1999). 

004995
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-2

Ecological benchmarks for earthworms and terrestrial plants recommended by the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) were also considered as SBVs (TCEQ, 2001). 

The TCEQ benchmarks were selected from a compendium of benchmarks from a variety of 

literature sources, including toxicological benchmarks from Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

(ORNL) and EPA ecological soil screening levels. 

EPA guidance (EPA, 2000a) provides a set of risk-based soil screening levels (Eco-SSLs) for 

many of the soil contaminants that are frequently of ecological concern for terrestrial plants and 

animals at hazardous waste sites. These Eco SSLs are concentrations of contaminants in soil that 

are protective of ecological receptors that commonly come into contact with soil or ingest biota 

that live in or on soil. Eco-SSLs are derived separately for four groups of ecological receptors: 

plants, soil invertebrates, birds and mammals. As such, these values are presumed to provide 

adequate protection of terrestrial ecosystems (EPA, 2000). Twenty-four contaminants are 

initially addressed by the Eco-SSL guidance, including 17 metals and seven organics. Note that 

the Eco-SSLs are not designed to be used as cleanup levels. 

Terrestrial assessments are one of the least developed aspects of ecological risk assessment and 

EPA has drafted limited screening values for this component (EPA, 2001). As an additional 

source EPA has recommended soil screening values developed by Friday et. al., for the 

Savannah River Technology Center (1998). These screening values are a summary of screening 

values from a variety of sources and are also presented in Table 4-1. 

ORNL has developed toxicological benchmarks for screening COPECs for effects on ecological 

receptors. Toxicity of selected chemicals to soil and litter dwelling invertebrates, microbes, 

microbial processes, and terrestrial plants was obtained from database and literature searches. 

Reports of toxicity tests of individual chemicals in laboratory, greenhouse, or field settings were 

obtained. The toxicity benchmarks were derived by rank-ordering the lowest observed effect 

concentrations (LOECs) and picking a number approximating the 10th percentile. If there were 

10 or fewer values for a chemical, the lowest LOEC was used. Proposed screening benchmarks 

were developed for toxic effects of contaminants in soils to earthworms, microbial processes, 

and terrestrial plants (Efroymson et al., 1997a; Efroymson et al., 1997b, Sample et. al., 1998). 

004996
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-3

In addition, ORNL has derived wildlife preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) for soil by 

iteratively calculating exposure estimates using different soil concentrations and soil-to-biota 

contaminant uptake models (Efroymson et al., 1997c). The soil concentrations were manipulated 

to produce an exposure estimate equivalent to the wildlife endpoint-specific and contaminant 

specific lowest observable adverse effect level (LOAEL). PRGs were developed for six species: 

short-tailed shrew, white-footed mouse, red fox, white-tailed deer, American woodcock, and redtailed hawk. For each chemical, the PRG for each of the wildlife species was compared, and the 

lowest value was selected as the final wildlife PRG. 

EPA Region 6 has developed terrestrial plant and soil invertebrate toxicity reference values 

based on bulk soil exposures (EPA, 1999a). Available terrestrial plant toxicity reference values 

and soil invertebrate toxicity values from the scientific literature were used to develop Toxicity 

Reference Values (TRVs). If no toxicity value was available for a COPEC, the TRV for a 

surrogate COPEC was adopted. 

4.1.1 Site-Specific Background 

Background screening values were derived for naturally occurring inorganics using site-specific 

background soil samples. Three surface soil locations (SM133, SM134, and SM135) were 

sampled adjacent to the SMS Site and analyzed for metals to calculate site-specific background 

concentrations (see Figure 3-3). Only those metals that were detected from at least one of the 

three locations were calculated as background and included in this assessment as screening 

values for soil. Site-specific background concentrations were calculated using the arithmetic 

mean for constituents with 100% frequency of detection or the maximum detected concentration 

for constituents with a frequency of detection less than 100%. Four metals, antimony, cadmium, 

selenium, and thallium, were not detected at any of the background locations. The arithmetic 

mean and the maximum detected concentration were used for the background calculation instead 

of a more statistically robust calculation because of the limited sample size (n = 3). A complete 

summary of analytical data for background soil is presented in Table 3-10. 

004997
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-4

4.2 SEDIMENT 

The comparison of concentrations to sediment benchmarks is the initial step in the sediment 

quality triad approach, where the intensity and extent of exposure to chemical stressors are 

evaluated using three measures of exposure, including sediment chemistry data, porewater 

chemistry data, and tissue chemistry data (CDM, 2001). 

No regulatory criteria or standards have been established for sediments. Sediment chemical 

concentrations are compared to sediment SBVs to assess the toxicity of COPEC to benthic and 

epibenthic life (i.e., organisms that live on or within the sediments). Multiple screening 

benchmark values are presented to help portray the entire spectrum of concentrations that have 

been associated with various probabilities of adverse biological effect. Focus was given first to 

the effects-range low (ER-L) values as the most appropriate no effect level screening criteria and 

then to other values such as the median effects level (ER-M) values as an appropriate second tier 

comparison. SBVs for sediment are presented in Table 4-2. 

The EPA has been conducting an RI/FS for the Calcasieu Estuary, which is in close proximity to 

the SMS Site and provides very similar habitat to Sabine Lake (CDM, 2000a, 2000b). In the 

Calcasieu Estuary Investigation, numerical effects-based sediment quality guidelines (SQGs) 

were selected from available literature-based SQGs for the protection of aquatic life. The SQGs 

for marine/estuarine systems include ER-M values developed by Long et al. (1995), marine 

Probable Effects Levels (PELs) from MacDonald et al. (1996), and freshwater Probable Effect 

Concentrations (PECs) from MacDonald et al. (2000). These recommended SQGs were 

considered as sediment SBVs for the SMS Site. Since the constituents of potential concern at the 

Calcasieu Estuary were not the same as those detected at the SMS Site, and not as conservative 

as no-effect levels, additional sediment benchmarks were considered as SBVs for the SMS Site 

as discussed below. 

NOAA has compiled a set of Screening Quick Reference Tables (SquiRTs) that present 

screening concentrations for various inorganic and organic contaminants in several 

environmental media including sediment (Buchman, 1999). For sediments, multiple benchmark 

concentrations are presented by Buchman to help portray the entire spectrum of concentrations 

that are associated with various probabilities of adverse biological effects for both freshwater and 

004998
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-5

marine systems. This spectrum ranges from presumably nontoxic to highly toxic levels. NOAA 

has also developed a data query manager that allows review of environmental data compiled for 

various sites (2002). The sediment benchmark values that are summarized in SQuiRT are also 

listed in part by the NOAA query manager. For constituents not listed by the query manager, 

ER-L, ER-M, PEL, and PEC, values were obtained from the NOAA SQuiRT. 

Ecological benchmarks for both freshwater and marine sediment recommended by the TCEQ 

were also considered as SBVs (2001). The TCEQ benchmarks were selected from a 

compendium of sediment benchmarks from a variety of sources including NOAA ER-L and 

ER-M values. 

4.2.1 Site-Specific Background 

Background screening values were derived for naturally occurring inorganics in sediment using 

site-specific background samples. Five surface sediment locations (RF001, RF002, RF003, 

RF004, and RF005) were sampled directly adjacent to Sydnes Island (1 mile east of Pleasure 

Islet) and analyzed for metals for the purposes of calculating site-specific background 

concentrations (see Figure 3-3). Only those metals that were detected from at least one of the 

five locations were calculated as background and included in this assessment as screening values 

for sediment. Site-specific background values for sediment were calculated using either the 

arithmetic mean for constituents with 100% frequency of detection or the maximum detected 

concentration for constituents with less than 100% frequency of detection. Five metals, copper, 

selenium, silver, thallium, and cyanide, were not detected at any of the background locations. 

Tributyltin was detected at all 5 background locations but not calculated as a screening value for 

background because anthropogenic sources of this contaminant are high in and around Pleasure 

Islet. The arithmetic mean and the maximum detected value were used in the derivation of 

background concentrations instead of a more statistically robust calculation because of the 

limited sample size (n = 5). A complete summary of analytical data for background sediment is 

presented in Table 3-16. 

004999
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-6

4.3 GROUNDWATER 

The range of detected concentrations in groundwater and surface water were compared to Texas 

Water Quality Standards (TWQS) [TCEQ, 1997]. Groundwater or surface water SBVs that were 

not available from the TWQS for a particular constituent were based on the lowest or most 

conservative of the following values: 

 Federal Ambient Water Quality Criteria (AWQC) (40 CFR 131.36) [EPA, 1996]. 

 Tier II Secondary Chronic Values (Suter, 1996). 

For certain chemicals where sufficient information was unavailable to calculate an AWQC, the 

Federal Standards LOAELs were used (EPA, 1999b). Office of Solid Waste and Emergency 

Response (OSWER) Tier II Values, as taken from ORNL documentation, were used when no 

information from the TWQS or the AWQC was available. Constituents that did not have water 

quality benchmarks were identified in the comparison results tables. The lowest of the 

groundwater SBVs selected were multiplied by 10 to achieve a dilution factor appropriate for 

assessing the potential impact to surface waters in Lake Sabine from the groundwater. This 

approach was discussed with NOAA’s Coastal Resource Manager, Ron Gouguet, during work 

plan and scoping meetings on the SMS Site as an approach to assessing possible ecologically 

related groundwater to surface water impacts. The appropriate reference for this approach was 

cited from the NOAA SQuiRTs (Buchman, 1999). The SBVs for groundwater are presented in 

Table 4-3. 

4.4 WILDLIFE 

Using standard food-chain modeling methodology and information from TCEQ (2001) and EPA 

(1999a) for constituents considered to be bioaccumulative in aquatic and terrestrial 

environments, SBVs were developed by back calculating soil or sediment concentrations that 

would be equivalent to acceptable ecological exposure levels for selected species of wildlife. 

These selected species are called measurement receptors and are assumed to be representative of 

other species with similar feeding guilds and life histories. 

Discussion on the selection of bioaccumulative constituents, measurement receptors, exposure 

parameters, biota accumulation factors (BAFs), and TRVs is presented as follows: 

005000
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-7

 Determine Bioaccumulative COPEC—Section 4.4.1, 

 Select Measurement Receptors—Section 4.4.2, 

 Input Exposure Parameters—Section 4.4.3, 

 Estimate Tissue Residues—Section 4.4.4, and 

 Select Toxicity Reference Values—Section 4.4.5. 

SBVs for each measurement receptor are derived in Tables 4-4 through 4-7. A summary of the 

SBVs for all the measurement receptors is presented in Table 4-8. 

4.4.1 Determine Bioaccumulative COPEC 

Only those COPEC that were considered to be bioaccumulative in soil and sediment were 

considered in the development of food-chain SBVs. The bioaccumulative COPEC for soil and 

sediment were developed using the information on bioaccumulative chemicals as presented in 

Section 3.4, Identification and Evaluation of Bioaccumulative Chemicals and Table 3-1 of the 

Texas Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance (TCEQ, 2001). Those bioaccumulative COPEC 

that were detected in sediment or soil at the SMS Site can be summarized as follows: 

Constituent Soil Sediment 

Hexachlorobenzene X X 

Cadmium X X 

Chromium X -- 

Copper X X 

Lead X -- 

Nickel X X 

Mercury X X 

Selenium X X 

Zinc X X 

Tributyltin -- X 

Food-chain SBVs were not developed for several COPEC as listed by TCEQ because they were 

not sampled during this investigation of the SMS Site. A review and screening of historical data 

concluded that these “other” constituents were present at very low concentration and not siterelated. Additional constituents that were not present based on this information included the 

organochlorine pesticides, poly-chlorinated bipheryls (PCBs), dioxin/furans, and some other 

semi-volatiles. 

005001
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-8

4.4.2 Select Measurement Receptors 

Two avian species of wildlife (spotted sandpiper, belted kingfisher), representing the carnivorous 

shore bird feeding guild in the freshwater/wetland and estuarine/wetland food webs, were 

selected as measurement receptors for the off-site sediments. The spotted sandpiper was an 

appropriate receptor for assessing potential exposure to bioaccumulative contaminants primarily 

in the intertidal sediment through ingestion of benthic macroinvertebrates. The kingfisher was 

appropriate for assessment potential exposure to the nearshore and offshore sediments through 

ingestion of small and medium sized fish. 

One avian species of wildlife (Northern bobwhite quail), representing the omnivorous bird 

feeding guild in the Texas shrub/scrub food web, and one mammalian species of wildlife (whitefooted mouse), representing the omnivorous mammal feeding guild in the Texas shrub/scrub 

food web, were selected as measurement receptors for the uplands soils. The bobwhite and the 

mouse were appropriate receptors for assessing potential exposure to bioaccumulative 

contaminants in the upland source areas through the ingestion of plants and terrestrial 

invertebrates. The selection of a bird and mammal covers any potential for difference in 

toxicological sensitivity between the two receptors. 

While the presence of these receptors has not been directly established (through observations) 

on-site or off-site, their habitat ranges cover coastal southeast Texas and Lake Sabine including 

wetland and scrub/shrub habitat on and adjacent to the SMS Site. In addition to preference of 

habitat, the selected receptors have readily available exposure information and are also 

recommended as measurement receptors by both the EPA (1999a) and TCEQ (2001). 

COPEC exposure to terrestrial wildlife occurs primarily when animals take up bioaccumulative 

constituents while feeding in areas impacted by site contamination. The species selected as 

measurement receptors represent a range of feeding relationships that are consistent with the 

principal habitats present at the site. It is also important to note that these receptors were 

selected to represent exposures other (similar) species with comparable feeding guilds and life 

histories may be receiving, and thus, serve as “surrogate” receptors to others within the 

ecosystem. 

005002
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-9

The presence of threatened and endangered species, their feeding and migratory behaviors, and 

their preferred habitats were also considered in the selection of measurement receptors for the 

SMS Site. Several federal and state endangered and threatened avian and mammalian species 

were reported during a database search by the Wildlife Management agencies for the SMS Site 

(see Attachment C). Listed small mammals include the Mexican long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris 

nivalis) and the eastern big-eared bat (Plecotus rafinesquei). Listed songbirds include the blackcapped vireo (Vireo atricapillus), golden-cheeked warbler (Dendroica chrysoparia), 

southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), and Bachman’s sparrow 

(Aimophila aestivalis). Listed shorebirds and waterbirds include the white-faced ibis (Plegadis 

chichi), Eskimo curlew (Numenius borealis), wood stork (Myceria americana), and the piping 

plover (Charadrius melodus) (TPWD, 2001; USFWS, 1994, 1995). 

Although none of these species were selected as measurement receptors for the SMS Site, the 

exposure and toxicity assigned to the receptors that were selected is considered to be protective 

of all species with similar feeding guilds and life histories, including species of special status. 

The criteria used in selecting measurement receptors was primarily based on the presence and 

abundance of appropriate habitat and food associated with the SMS Site. Further discussion 

regarding the selection of measurement receptors and species of special status is presented below 

as well as in Attachment C. 

4.4.2.1 Northern Bobwhite 

The Northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) was selected as a measurement receptor for the 

omnivorous bird feeding guild in the Texas shrub/scrub food web. The proposed Northern 

bobwhite SBVs are derived in Table 4-4 and summarized in Table 4-8. The bobwhite was 

chosen as a measurement receptor based on the following information (EPA, 1999a; TCEQ, 

2001): 

 The bobwhite plays an important role in seed dispersion for many plant species, and 

is an important prey item for snakes, and other small mammals. If habitat conditions 

permit, their numbers will increase rapidly, providing an additional food source for 

many predators. They are also valuable in controlling insect populations during 

certain times of the year. 

005003
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-10

 The bobwhite’s diet consists mainly of seeds and invertebrates, although in the 

winter, green vegetation can dominate its diet. During breeding season, the 

bobwhite’s home range may encompass several hectares, including areas for foraging, 

cover, and a nest site. In non-breeding season, the bobwhite’s home range can be as 

large as 16 hectares. It has a high potential for exposure through ingestion and 

dermal contact with soil during dust bathing. 

 The availability of natural history/toxicological information (e.g., home range 

ingestion rates, body weights, TRVs) also support selection as a measurement 

receptor. 

Several listed songbird species occur in the vicinity of the SMS Site. None of these species were 

selected as a measurement species for the shrub/scrub habitat because of inappropriate habitat or 

lack of appropriate food supply. The following is a brief description of these species: 

 Black-capped vireos nest in Texas during April through July, and spend the winter on 

the western coast of Mexico. They build a cup-shaped nest in the fork of a branch 

2 to 4 ft above the ground. Nests are usually built in shrubs such as shin oak or 

sumac. Vireos feed on insects and inhabit rangelands with scattered clumps of shrubs 

separated by open grassland (TPWD, 1999). 

 Bachman’s sparrow is an uncommon sparrow found in the open pine woods and 

brushy fields of east Texas. It is secretive and difficult to locate in the winter; in the 

summer it perches in the open and sings. This sparrow eats seeds of herbaceous 

plants and pines, and insects. They do most of their foraging on the ground (Sarkozi, 

1996). 

 The southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) is a small 

insectivorous bird that breeds in dense riparian habitats across the southwestern 

United States (USFWS, 2002). 

 Golden-cheeked warblers nest only in central Texas in mixed ashe-juniper and oak 

woodlands in ravines and canyons. Warblers eat insects and spiders found on the 

leaves and bark of oaks and other trees. They use long strips of cedar bark and spider 

webs to build their nests. They come to Texas in March to nest and raise their young, 

and leave in July to spend the winter in Mexico and Central America (TPWD, 1999). 

4.4.2.2 Spotted Sandpiper 

The spotted sandpiper (Actitis macularia) was selected as a measurement receptor for the 

carnivorous shore bird guild in the Texas freshwater wetland and brackish/intermediate food 

webs. The proposed spotted sandpiper SBVs are derived in Table 4-5 and summarized in Table 

005004
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-11

4-8. The spotted sandpiper was chosen as a measurement receptor based on the following 

information (EPA, 1999a; TCEQ, 2001): 

 The spotted sandpiper inhabits a wide variety of habitats usually associated with 

water or marsh. Spotted sandpipers have a high potential for exposure through 

ingestion of aquatic insects, worms, fish, crustaceans, mollusks, and carrion. 

 The availability of natural history information (e.g., home range, ingestion rates, body 

weights, TRVs) also supports selection as a measurement receptor. 

Several listed shorebird species occur in the vicinity of the SMS Site. None of these species 

were selected as a measurement species for the freshwater wetland and brackish/intermediate 

habitats because of inappropriate habitat or lack of appropriate food supply. The following is a 

brief description of these species: 

 Piping plovers eat marine worms, flies, beetles, spiders, crustaceans, mollusks and 

other small marine invertebrates. They inhabit sandy beaches and lakeshores, 

migrating through the Great Lakes along the river systems through the Bahamas and 

West Indies. Currently found along the Atlantic Coast from Canada to North 

Carolina and along the shorelines of Lakes Michigan and Superior in Michigan. They 

spend the winter along the Gulf Coast beaches from Florida to Mexico, and the 

Atlantic coast from Florida to North Carolina (TPWD, 1999). 

 The Eskimo curlew is thought to be very close to extinction. They feed on 

grasshoppers, grasshopper eggs, grubs, and cutworms, while inhabiting a variety of 

grassland areas. The curlew migrates from breeding grounds across the Arctic tundra 

through North American prairies to wintering grounds on the Pampas grasslands of 

Argentina (TPWD, 1999). 

 The white-faced Ibis seems to prefer freshwater marshes where it can find insects, 

newts, leeches, earthworms, snails and especially crayfish, frogs and fish. The Ibis 

roosts on low platforms of dead reed stems or on mud banks (TPWD, 1999). 

 Wood storks are wetland dwellers and use fresh, brackish, and salt-water habitats for 

feeding and nesting. Feeding takes place in shallow ponds, tidal pools, swamps, and 

marshes. Nesting occurs in cypress, hardwood, and mangrove swamps. Standing in 

6 to 20 in. (15 to 51 cm) of water with its submerged beak open 2 to 3 in. (5 to 8 cm), 

the wood stork gropes for its prey. This usually consists of fish, occasionally crayfish 

and amphibians, baby alligators, and snakes (Mazzotti, 1999). 

005005
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-12

4.4.2.3 Belted Kingfisher 

More so than any other type of wildlife, a piscivore would generally have the greatest potential 

of exposure to contaminants in the aquatic environment via food-chain uptake. Based on its 

widespread distribution, relatively low body weight, exclusive diet of fish, and frequent inclusion 

in assessments of aquatic ecosystems, the belted kingfish (Ceryle alcyon) was selected as a 

measurement receptor for screening off-site sediments at the SMS Site. The belted kingfisher is 

assumed to represent other species of carnivorous shore birds that feed exclusively on fish from 

the highest trophic level as shown in the feeding guilds for Texas freshwater/wetland and 

estuarine/wetland food webs (TCEQ, 2001). Carnivorous shore birds not only provide an 

important functional role to the environment by regulating lower trophic level prey populations 

and influencing species composition in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, but they also provide 

egg dispersal for some fish and aquatic invertebrates. 

The belted kingfisher was chosen as a measurement receptor based on the following speciesspecific information (EPA, 1999a; TCEQ, 2001): 

 As a higher trophic level predator, the belted kingfisher provides an important 

component to the ecosystem by influencing the population dynamics of its prey. 

 The belted kingfisher is found statewide along rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, coasts, 

and estuaries. Its diet consists of mostly fish that swim near the surface or in shallow 

water. It nests in burrows in earthen banks, generally near suitable fishing areas. Its 

home range is measured in shoreline length and averages approximately 

1.5 kilometers. Due to its dietary habits and relatively small bodyweight, there is a 

high potential for exposure. 

 The availability of natural history/toxicological information (e.g., home range, 

ingestion rates, body weights, TRVs) also support selection as a measurement 

receptor. 

The proposed belted kingfisher food-chain SBVs are derived in Table 4-6 and summarized in 

Table 4-8. 

4.4.2.4 White-Footed Moose 

The white-footed mouse (Peromyscus polionotus) was selected as the measurement receptor for 

the omnivorous mammal guild in the Texas shrub/scrub food web. The proposed white-footed 

005006
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-13

mouse SBVs are presented on Table 4-7 and summarized in Table 4-8. The white-footed mouse 

was selected as a measurement receptor based on the following information (EPA, 1999a; 

TCEQ, 2001): 

 The white-footed mouse plays an important role in seed dispersal and provides an 

important food source for raptors, snakes, and other mammals including cats, 

weasels, and fox. 

 The white-footed mouse feeds on nuts, seeds, fruits, beetles, caterpillars, and other 

insects. Due to its burrowing and dietary habits, there is a high potential for direct 

and indirect exposure. 

 The availability of natural history information (e.g., home range, ingestion rates, body 

weights, TRVs) also supports selection as a measurement receptor. 

Two listed small mammals species (the Mexican Long-nosed Bats and the Rafinesque’s bigeared bat) occur in the vicinity of the SMS Site. Neither of these species was selected as a 

measurement species for the shrub/scrub habitat because of inappropriate locale or lack of 

appropriate food supply. The following is a brief description of these species: 

 During the day, Mexican Long-nosed Bats roost in caves in large groups called 

colonies. Strong fliers that can hover like hummingbirds, these bats come out at night 

to feed on the nectar and pollen in flowers of desert plants such as agaves. With long 

noses and tongues, they are well-adapted for nectar-feeding. They also help the 

agave plants reproduce by spreading pollen. The bats migrate between Big Bend and 

southern Mexico following the bloom periods of food plants (TPWD, 1999). 

 Rafinesque’s big-eared bats occur in forested regions largely devoid of natural caves. 

Its natural roosting places are in hollow trees, crevices behind bark, and under dry 

leaves. It has been observed most frequently in buildings, both occupied and 

abandoned. Texas specimens have been captured in barns and abandoned wells. 

Specific food items have not been recorded but small, night-flying insects, especially 

moths, are probably important. The bats probably do not hibernate in East Texas, but 

in the northern part of their range they tend to seek out underground retreats and 

hibernate through the winter (Davis and Schmidly, 1994). 

4.4.3 Input Exposure Parameters 

All exposure parameters (i.e., sediment intake rates, food ingestion rates, tissue moisture 

contents, and body weights) were obtained from EPA (1999a or b) and TCEQ (2001). The 

exposure parameters are based on the assumption that all receptors spend 100% of their lifetime 

in contaminated areas and consume 100% of their prey from contaminated areas. The white005007
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-14

footed mouse and Northern bobwhite quail are assumed to consume diets of 50% terrestrial 

plants and 50% terrestrial invertebrates. A sandpiper is assumed to consume a diet of 100% 

aquatic invertebrates and a kingfisher is assumed to eat 100% fish. Plant, invertebrate, and fish 

tissue residues are predicted through the use of BAFs from soil and sediment as discussed in 

detail in Section 4.4.4. 

Bioavailability is a ratio of concentrations; the concentration of a contaminant that reaches a 

point of toxic action in an organism over the concentration of that contaminant in the 

environmental media that the organism first contacts (TCEQ, 2001). Uptake and elimination 

rates of the bioavailable form of a contaminant are important factors since the combined effects 

of these factors determine whether the material is accumulated or eliminated. Bioavailability is 

the cumulative expression of physical, chemical, and biological processes evident in air, water, 

soil, and sediment, as well as biological factors present in the bodies, organs, tissues, or cells of 

exposed organisms that act to change that organism's rate of contaminant exposure. A default 

value of 100% was used for soil and sediment bioavailability ratios (meaning a one to one ratio). 

4.4.4 Bioaccumulation Factors 

A bioaccumulation factor (BAF) is the ratio of the concentration of a contaminant in an 

organism to the concentration in the ambient environment at steady state, where the organism 

can take in the contaminant through ingestion of food as well as through direct contact. A biotasediment accumulation factor (BSAF) is a specific form of BAF equivalent to the ratio of a lipidnormalized tissue residue and an organic carbon normalized sediment concentration (TCEQ, 

2001). A bioconcentration factor (BCF) is the ratio of the concentration of a contaminant in an 

organism to the concentration in the ambient environment (typically water) at steady state. 

These terms are used interchangeably. 

For this part of the screening evaluation, sediment accumulation factors used to predict the 

uptake of contaminants from sediment into fish tissue will be called BSAFs. This includes both 

organic constituents, (using the normalization processes discussed above) and inorganic 

constituents, which are based on ratios of the fish tissue and sediment concentrations without 

lipid or organic carbon normalization. BSAFs were used to predict the uptake of constituents 

005008
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-15

from soil into plant and terrestrial invertebrate tissues. No normalization was used on the BAFs 

derived for soil-to-plant and soil-to-invertebrates. 

4.4.4.1 Sediment 

BSAFs account for the transfer of chemicals specifically from the sediment to the tissues of an 

organism and are recommended for modeling nonpolar organics including dioxin-like 

compounds and polychlorinated biphenyls because of their lipophilic nature (EPA, 1998). 

BSAFs for fish/sediment were based on high- and low-level bioaccumulation factors derived 

from several fish species as available from the Calcasieu Estuary Investigation database. A 

focus was made to obtain co-located fish/sediment data which limited the dataset to the EPA 

Phase 2 Study. All fish tissue and sediment chemistry data were initially downloaded from 

EPA’s website http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6sf/sfsites/datarep.htm and were queried using the 

NOAA Query Manager 2.0 software, also downloaded from EPA’s Calcasieu Estuary web site. 

BSAFs for fish and aquatic invertebrates and details on the methodology for deriving them are 

presented in Tables 4-9 and 4-10, respectively. Inorganic and organometal (such as tributyltin) 

BSAFs were derived without normalizing to lipid and organic carbon because they do not adhere 

to the sediment uptake rules that govern lipophilic organics. BSAFs for these metal and metallike constituents may be more appropriately called BAFs because uptake of the chemical into 

fish is assumed to occur through pathways other than sediment (e.g., food and water) and uptake 

of these constituents is not controlled by the organic carbon in the sediment nor the lipid content 

in the fish. 

4.4.4.2 Soil 

Tissue residues for plants and terrestrial invertebrates were predicted from soil concentrations in 

the upland area through use of laboratory and field-derived BAFs obtained from scientific 

literature and from regression models based on literature-derived data. Uptake factors from EPA 

(1999) were primarily used to estimate tissue concentrations from soil. A secondary source of 

uptake factors included values from ORNL, the Bechtel-Jacobs Company (BJC, 1998) and 

Sample et al. (1996). Uptake factors are presented as part of the food-chain SBV calculations for 

the bobwhite quail and white-footed mouse in Tables 4-4 and 4-7. 

005009
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

DEVELOPMENT OF SCREENING BENCHMARK VALUES 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

4-16

4.4.5 Select Toxicity Reference Values 

Wildlife TRVs were obtained primarily from EPA (1999a). If a TRV was not available from this 

source, TRVs were obtained from Sample et al. (1996). 

Body scaling parameters (i.e., body mass) were used to estimate a toxic concentration for a class 

of organisms (e.g., the toxic dose to mammals). As cited in TCEQ (2001), the endpoint for an 

avian or mammalian guild member can be estimated using an equation of the form: 

( b )

w

t

w t

BW

BW NOAEL NOAEL

−





 



 =

1

where: 

NOAELw = NOAEL for avian or mammalian wildlife species. 

NOAELt = NOAEL for avian or mammalian test species. 

BWt = body weight of avian or mammalian test species. 

BWw = body weight of avian or mammalian wildlife species. 

b = allometric scaling factor that is specific to either birds or mammals.

Default average scaling factors of r2 = 1.2 for birds and r2 = 0.94 for mammals were applied from 

Sample et al. (1996) in the absence of chemical-specific scaling factors (TCEQ, 2001). 

Wildlife SBVs were developed for no effect level TRVs. Uncertainty factors were applied, as 

needed, to develop a TRV based on no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) data. All the 

benchmarks for the white-footed mouse and the Northern bobwhite are proposed as SBVs for 

upland soil. All the SBVs for the spotted sandpiper and the belted kingfisher are proposed as 

wildlife SBV for off-site sediment. 

005010
Fridayd 

CASRN Constituents Earthworm Plants Plant Invertebrate Avian Mammal Earthworm

Soil 

Microorganisms Plants Wildlife

Ecological 

Screening Value

Terrestrial 

Plants

Soil 

Invertebrate

SVOCs (mg/kg)

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 1.2 25 51-28-5 2,4-Dinitrophenol -- 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 -- 20 -- -- 53-70-3 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 25 56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 25 59-50-7 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 67-72-1 Hexachloroethane -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 77-47-4 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene -- 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- 10 0.1 -- 86-74-8 Carbazole -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl -- 60 -- -- -- -- -- -- 60 -- -- -- 98-86-2 Acetophenone -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 105-60-2 Caprolactam -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 108-60-1 2,2'-Oxybis(1-chloropropane) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

1912-24-9 Atrazine -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00005 -- -- 

78-59-1 Isophorone -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 83-32-9 Acenaphthene -- 20 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20 -- -- 84-66-2 Diethylphthalate -- 100 -- -- -- -- -- -- 100 -- 100 -- -- 84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate -- 200 -- -- -- -- -- -- 200 -- 200 -- -- 85-01-8 Phenanthrene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- 85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 86-30-6 N-nitrosodiphenylamine 20 -- -- -- -- -- 20 -- -- -- 20 -- -- 86-73-7 Fluorene 30 -- -- -- -- -- 30 -- -- -- 30 -- -- 87-68-3 Hexachlorobutadiene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol 6 3 -- -- -- -- 6 400 3 -- 0.002 1.73 10 88-06-2 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 10 -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- -- -- 10 -- -- 88-74-4 2-Nitroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 88-75-5 2-Nitrophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91-20-3 Naphthalene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- 91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 91-58-7 2-Chloronaphthalene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- 91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 95-48-7 2-Methylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.5 -- -- 95-57-8 2-Chlorophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 95-95-4 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 9 4 -- -- -- -- 9 -- 4 -- 4 -- -- 98-95-3 Nitrobenzene -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 1000 -- -- 40 -- 2.26 99-09-2 3-Nitroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

100-01-6 4-Nitroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 100-02-7 4-Nitrophenol 7 -- -- -- -- -- 7 -- -- -- 7 -- -- 101-55-3 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 105-67-9 2,4-Dimethylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 106-44-5 4-Methylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.5 -- -- 106-47-8 4-Chloroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 108-95-2 Phenol 30 70 -- -- -- -- 30 100 70 -- 0.05 -- -- 111-44-4 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 111-91-1 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 117-81-7 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene -- -- -- -- -- -- 1000 -- -- 0.0025 -- -- 120-12-7 Anthracene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- 120-83-2 2,4-Dichlorophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 121-14-2 2,4-Dinitrotoluene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 129-00-0 Pyrene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- 131-11-3 Dimethylphthalate 200 -- -- -- -- -- 200 -- -- -- 200 -- -- 132-64-9 Dibenzofuran -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 25 205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 25 206-44-0 Fluoranthene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- 

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil

Table 4-1

TNRCC a EPA Ecological SSL b ORNL c EPA Region 6 e

4/22/2003: 9:20 AM 

005011
Fridayd 

CASRN Constituents Earthworm Plants Plant Invertebrate Avian Mammal Earthworm

Soil 

Microorganisms Plants Wildlife

Ecological 

Screening Value

Terrestrial 

Plants

Soil 

Invertebrate

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil

Table 4-1

TNRCC a EPA Ecological SSL b ORNL c EPA Region 6 e

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 25 208-96-8 Acenaphthylene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

218-01-9 Chrysene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.2 25 

534-52-1 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

606-20-2 2,6-Dinitrotoluene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

621-64-7 N-nitroso-di-n-propylamine -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7005-72-3 4-chlorophenyl-phenyl ether -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

Metals (mg/kg- dry wt)

7429-90-5 Aluminum -- 50 * * * * -- 600 50 -- 50 5 -- 

7440-36-0 Antimony -- 5 P -- -- 21 -- -- 5 -- 3.5 0.5 -- 7440-38-2 Arsenic 60 37 37 P P P 60 100 10 9.9 10 1 0.25 7440-39-3 Barium -- 500 -- -- -- -- -- 3000 500 283 165 5 -- 7440-41-7 Beryllium -- 10 -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 -- 1.1 0.1 -- 

7440-43-9 Cadmium 110 29 29 110 P P 20 20 4 4.2 1.6 0.2 10 

7440-70-2 Calcium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7440-47-3 Chromium 0.4 5 5 P 21 360 0.4 10 1 16.1 0.4 -- -- 

1854-029-9 Chromium (VI) -- -- -- -- -- 330 -- -- -- -- -- 0.018 0.2 

7440-48-4 Cobalt -- 20 P -- 32 340 -- 1000 20 20 -- -- 

7440-50-8 Copper 61 100 P 61 P P 50 100 100 370 40 1 32 

7439-89-6 Iron -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 200 -- -- 200 -- -- 

7439-92-1 Lead 500 50 -- -- -- -- 500 900 50 40.5 50 4.6 100 

7439-95-4 Magnesium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7439-96-5 Manganese -- 500 -- -- -- -- -- 100 500 100 -- -- 

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.1 0.3 -- -- -- -- 0.1 30 0.3 0.00051 0.1 0.349 2.5 

7440-02-0 Nickel 200 30 -- -- -- -- 200 90 30 121 30 25 100 

7440-09-7 Potassium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7782-49-2 Selenium 70 1 -- -- -- -- 70 100 1 0.21 0.81 0.05 7.7 

7440-22-4 Silver -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 50 2 -- 2 0.02 -- 

7440-23-5 Sodium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

7440-28-0 Thallium -- 1 -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 2.1 1 0.01 -- 

7440-62-2 Vanadium -- 2 -- -- -- -- -- 20 2 55 2 -- -- 7440-66-6 Zinc 120 190 190 120 P P 200 100 50 8.5 50 0.9 199 

57-12-5 Cyanide (free) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.9 -- -- 

Notes:

a TNRCC. 2001. Guidance for Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments at Remediation Sites in Texas. RG-263 (revised).b EPA. 2000. Ecological Soil Screening Level Guidance. Draft. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response. 10 July 2000. c Oak Ridge National Laboratory Guidance Documents: Efroymson, R.A., G.W. Suter II, B.E. Sample, and D.S. Jones. 1997. Preliminary Remediation Goals for Ecological Endpoints. ES/ER/TM-162/R2. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

 Efroymson, R.A., M.W. Will, and G.W. Suter II. 1997. Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Contaminants of Potential Concern for Effects on Soil and Litter Invertebrates and Heterotrophic Process: 1997 Revision. ES/ER/TM-126/R2. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Ten Efroymson, R.A., M.W. Will, G.W. Suter II, and A.C. Wooten. 1997. Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Contaminants of Potential Concern for Effects on Terrestrial Plants: 1997 Revision. ES/ER/TM-85/R3. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

d Friday, G.P. 1998. Ecological Screening Values for Surface Water, Sediment, and Soil. Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Savannah River Technology Center. (WSRC-TR-98-00110). Aiken, SC 29808.e EPA Region 6. 1999. Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities. Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division. Center for Combustion Science and Engineering. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA-530-D-99-001Af Ecological Screening Benchmark Value is the lowest of the values presented.g Lower and upper range background concentrations taken from EPA Region 6 Medium-Specific Screening Level Guidance (9/2001; http://www.epa.gov/earth1r6/6pd/rcra_c/pd-n/screen.htm)h Texas-specific median background concentrations taken from the Texas Risk Reduction Program (TRRP) Guidance [Figure 30 TAC 350.51(m)].i Site-specific background values were calculated using the arithmetic mean for constituents with 100% frequency of detection or the maximum detected concentration for constituents with less than 100% frequency of detection. Background surface soils were sampled during the WESTON 20

4/22/2003: 9:20 AM 

005012
TNRCC TNRCC

Sediment Sediment 

CASRN Constituents ER-M PEL-SW ER-L ER-M AET Benchmarkd FW-CONPEC PEL-FW Benchmarkd

SVOCs (mg/kg)

50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene 1.8 0.763 0.43 1.8 1.1 0.43 1.45 0.782 0.0319 --

51-28-5 2,4-Dinitrophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

53-70-3 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.26 0.135 0.0634 0.26 0.23 0.0634 -- -- 0.033 --

56-55-3 Benzo(a)anthracene 1.6 0.693 0.261 1.6 0.96 0.261 1.05 0.3847 0.0317 --

59-50-7 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

67-72-1 Hexachloroethane -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

77-47-4 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

86-74-8 Carbazole -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

92-52-4 1,1'-Biphenyl -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

98-86-2 Acetophenone -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

100-52-7 Benzaldehyde -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

105-60-2 Caprolactam -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

108-60-1 2,2'-Oxybis(1-chloropropane) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

1912-24-9 Atrazine -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

78-59-1 Isophorone -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

83-32-9 Acenaphthene 0.5 0.0889 0.016 0.5 0.13 0.016 -- -- -- --

84-66-2 Diethylphthalate -- -- -- -- 0.2 -- -- -- -- --

84-74-2 Di-n-butylphthalate -- -- -- -- 1.4 -- -- -- -- --

85-01-8 Phenanthrene 1.5 0.544 0.24 1.5 -- 0.24 1.17 0.5149 0.0419 --

85-68-7 Butylbenzylphthalate -- -- -- -- 0.063 -- -- -- -- --

86-30-6 N-nitrosodiphenylamine -- -- -- -- 0.028 -- -- -- -- --

86-73-7 Fluorene 0.54 0.144 0.019 0.54 0.12 0.019 0.536 -- 0.0774 --

87-68-3 Hexachlorobutadiene -- -- -- -- 0.0013 -- -- -- -- --

87-86-5 Pentachlorophenol -- -- -- -- 0.36 -- -- -- -- --

88-06-2 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

88-74-4 2-Nitroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

88-75-5 2-Nitrophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

91-20-3 Naphthalene 2.1 0.391 0.16 2.1 0.23 0.16 0.561 -- 0.176 --

91-57-6 2-Methylnaphthalene 0.67 0.201 0.07 0.67 0.064 0.07 -- -- -- --

91-58-7 2-Chloronaphthalene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

91-94-1 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

95-48-7 2-Methylphenol -- -- -- -- 0.055 -- -- -- -- --

95-57-8 2-Chlorophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

95-95-4 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

98-95-3 Nitrobenzene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

99-09-2 3-Nitroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

100-01-6 4-Nitroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

100-02-7 4-Nitrophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

101-55-3 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

105-67-9 2,4-Dimethylphenol -- -- -- -- 0.029 -- -- -- -- --

106-44-5 4-Methylphenol -- -- -- -- 0.11 -- -- -- -- --

106-47-8 4-Chloroaniline -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

108-95-2 Phenol -- -- -- -- 0.42 -- -- -- -- --

111-44-4 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

111-91-1 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

117-81-7 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate -- 2.647 -- -- 1.3 0.182 -- -- -- --

117-84-0 Di-n-octylphthalate -- -- -- -- 6.2 -- -- -- -- --

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene -- -- -- -- 0.022 -- -- -- -- --

120-12-7 Anthracene 1.1 0.245 0.0853 1.1 0.28 0.0853 0.845 -- 0.0572 --

120-83-2 2,4-Dichlorophenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

121-14-2 2,4-Dinitrotoluene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

129-00-0 Pyrene 2.8 1.398 0.665 2.8 2.4 0.665 1.52 0.875 0.053 --

131-11-3 Dimethylphthalate -- -- -- -- 0.071 -- -- -- -- --

132-64-9 Dibenzofuran -- -- -- -- 0.11 -- -- -- -- --

191-24-2 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene -- -- -- -- 0.67 -- -- -- -- --

193-39-5 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene -- -- -- -- 0.6 -- -- -- -- --

205-99-2 Benzo(b)fluoranthene -- -- -- -- 1.8 -- -- -- -- --

206-44-0 Fluoranthene 5.1 1.494 0.6 5.1 1.3 0.6 2.23 2.3549 0.111 --

207-08-9 Benzo(k)fluoranthene -- -- -- -- 1.8 -- -- -- -- --

208-96-8 Acenaphthylene 0.64 0.128 0.044 0.64 0.071 0.044 -- -- -- --

218-01-9 Chrysene 2.8 0.846 0.384 2.8 0.95 0.384 1.29 0.8617 0.0571 --

534-52-1 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

606-20-2 2,6-Dinitrotoluene -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

621-64-7 N-nitroso-di-n-propylamine -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

7005-72-3 4-chlorophenyl-phenyl ether -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

LMWPAH LMW PAHs 3.16 1.44 0.552 3.16 1.2 0.552 -- -- -- --

HMWPAH HMW PAHs 9.6 6.68 1.7 9.6 7.9 1.7 -- --- -- --

TOTALPAH Total PAHs 45 16.8 4.02 45 -- 4.02 2.28 -- 4 --

Metals (mg/kg)

7429-90-5 Aluminum -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 431.4

7440-36-0 Antimony -- -- -- -- 9.3 -- -- -- 2 0.306

7440-38-2 Arsenic -- -- 8.2 70 57 8.2 -- 17 5.9 0.686

7440-39-3 Barium -- -- -- -- 48 -- -- -- -- 4.52

7440-41-7 Beryllium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.062

7440-43-9 Cadmium -- -- 1.2 9.6 2.7 1.2 -- 3.53 0.596 0.053

7440-70-2 Calcium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 110.82

7440-47-3 Chromium 370 160 81 370 96 81 111 90 37.3 1.088

1854-029-9 Chromium (VI) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

7440-48-4 Cobalt -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.86

7440-50-8 Copper 270 108 34 270 390 34 149 196.6 35.7 --

7439-89-6 Iron -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 20000 1694

7439-92-1 Lead 218 112 46.7 218 430 46.7 128 91.3 35 1.92

7439-95-4 Magnesium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 201.8

7439-96-5 Manganese -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 460 31.96

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.71 0.7 0.15 0.71 0.41 0.15 1.06 0.486 0.174 0.005

7440-02-0 Nickel 51.6 42.8 20.9 51.6 110 20.9 48.6 35.9 18 0.778

7440-09-7 Potassium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 119.82

7782-49-2 Selenium -- -- -- -- 1 -- -- -- -- --

7440-22-4 Silver -- -- 1 3.7 0.56 1 -- -- 1 --

7440-23-5 Sodium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 402.6

7440-28-0 Thallium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

7440-62-2 Vanadium -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2.28

7440-66-6 Zinc 410 271 150 410 410 150 459 314.8 123 4.86

57-12-5 Cyanide (free) -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Organotins (mg/kg)

688-73-3 Tributyltin (TBT) f 0.0163 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

a Baseline Ecological Risk Assessment (BERA). Baseline Problem Formulation, Volume I. Prepared for U.S. EPA Region 6. Work Assignment No. 041-RICO-0622. Revised September 2001. Table 9-2. CDM Federal Programs Corporation. 2001. Calcas

b NOAA. 2002. Query Manager Version 2. Office of Response and Restoration. Calcasieu Estuary Data Set.

c NOAA, 1999. Buchman, M.F. 1999. NOAA Screening Quick Reference Tables, NOAA HAZMAT Report 99-1, Seattle, WA. Coastal Protection and Restoration Division. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

d TNRCC. 2001. Guidance for Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments at Remediation Sites in Texas. RG-263 (revised). Table 3-3.

e Background surface sediments (0 to 6 inches) were sampled during the WESTON 2001 RI at five reference area locations adjacent to Sydnes Island (RFW01, RFW02, RFW03, RFW04, RFW05). Site-specific background values were calculated using the ar

f Value for TBT is based on the 18th percentile for chronic effects (lower screening value) converted to dry-weight by multiplying 1,255 ug-TBT/kg-OC by a site-wide average organic carbon value of 1.3%. Source: EPA (1996). Recommendations for Screen

AET = Apparent Effects Threshold; lowest values of five AET tests is presented.

ER-L = Effects range low.

ER-M = Effects range median.

FW-CONPEC = Freshwater consensus based probable effect concentration.

PEL-FW = Probable effect level - freshwater.

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Sediment—Benthic Invertebrates

Table 4-2

Marine Benchmarks Freshwater Benchmarks

BERAa,b,

Site Specific 

Background 

Screening 

Benchmark

e

BERAa,b NOAAc

4/22/2003: 9:25 AM Ecological SBVs.xls: Table 4-2

005013
CASRN Constituent of Potential Concern CMC CCC 

Table 4-3

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Groundwater

National Recommended Water Quality Criteriaa

Acute Chronic

Ambient Water Quality Criteriab

Acute

TNR

Benchm

Wa

TNRCC

Aquatic Life Protectionc

Chronic

Notes on National Water Quality Criteria:

a EPA, 1999. National Recommended Water Quality Criteria - Correction. Office of Water. EPA 822-Z-99-001.

 a.3 = hardness dependent criteria; based on a value of 100 mg/L calcium carbonate. a.2 = dissolved metal concentration in the water column. a.1 = total recoverable metal concentration in the water column.Element AcuteCadmium e1.128[ln(hardness)] - 3.6867

Chromium +3 e0.819[ln(hardness)] + 3.7256Chromium +6 --Copper e0.9422[ln(hardness)] - 1.700Lead e1.273[ln(hardness)] - 1.46Mercury --Nickel e0.846[ln(hardness)] + 2.255Silver e1.72[ln(hardness)] - 6.52Zinc e0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.884Notes on Screening Quick Reference Tables:

b Buchman, M.F. 1998. NOAA Screening Quick Reference Tables. NOAA HAZMAT Report 97-2. Seattle, WA. Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 12 pages.

 b.1 - Indicates hardness dependent criteria; based on a value of 100 mg/L calcium carbonate. b.2 - Indicates lowest observable effect level.; extrapolated to a no observed effect level by dividing by a factor of 10 (see Section 4.6.1.2 of work plan). Element Acute

Cadmium e1.128[ln(hardness)] - 3.828

Chromium +3 e0.819[ln(hardness)] + 3.688Copper e0.9422[ln(hardness)] - 1.464Lead e1.273[ln(hardness)] - 1.46Nickel e0.846[ln(hardness)] + 3.3612Silver e1.72[ln(hardness)] - 6.52Zinc e0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.8604Notes on Criteria for Aquatic Life Protection:

c TNRCC Criteria in Water for Specific Toxic Materials: Aquatic Life Protection [30 TAC 307.6(c)]

c.1 - Indicates that the criteria for a specific parameter are for the dissolved portion in water. All other criteria are for total recoverable concentrations, except where noted.

c.2 - Indicates a hardness value of 30 mg/L was applied, based on hardnes value for the Sabine River Basin [30 TAC 307.6(c)(8)].c.3 - Indicates that the criterion is multiplied by a water-effects ratio in order to incorporate the effects of local water chemistry on aquatic toxicity.Element Acute

Cadmium 0.973w x e1.128[ln(hardness)] - 1.6774

Chromium +3 0.316w x e0.819[ln(hardness)] + 3.688Copper 0.96w x e0.9422[ln(hardness)] - 1.3844Lead 0.889w x e1.273[ln(hardness)] - 1.46Nickel 0.998w x e0.846[ln(hardness)] + 3.3612Silver --Zinc 0.978w x e0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.8604The "w" Indicates that the criterion is multiplied by a water-effects ratio in order to incorporate the effects of local water chemistry on aquatic toxicity. The water-effects ratio is equal to 1 except where sufficient data is available to establish a site-specific, water-effect ratio. The number preced

d TNRCC. 2001. Guidance for Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments at Remediation Sites in Texas. RG-263 (revised).

 d.1 - Indicates a disssolved concentration. d.2 - Indicates a bioaccumulative contaminant of concern.

e EPA Region 6. 1999. Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment Protocol for Hazardous Waste Combustion Facilities. Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division. Center for Combustion Science and Engineering. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. EPA-530-D-99-001A.f Suter, G.W. II and C.L. Tsao. Toxicological Benchmarks for Screening Potential Contaminants of Concern for Effects on Aquatic Biota: 1996 Revision. ES/ER/TM-96/R2. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Value presented was selected as follows: 1st choice: NAWQC 

 f.1 - Indicates lowest observable effect level.; extrapolated to a no observed effect level by dividing by a factor of 10 (see Section 4.6.1.2 of work plan). 

g Groundwater Ecological SBV is 10 times the lowest of the values presented to account for dilution per guidance cited in the NOAA SQuiRTs (Buchman, 1999).

0.792w x e1.273[ln(hardness)] - 4.705

0.997w x e0.846[ln(hardness)] + 1.1645

CF = 0.978 CF = 0.986

Hardness-dependent water criteria:

CF = 0.998 CF = 0.997

CF = 0.85

--

0.986w x e0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.7614

Chronic

0.909w x e0.7852[ln(hardness)] - 3.49

0.860w x e0.819[ln(hardness)] + 1.561

0.96w x e0.8545[ln(hardness)] - 1.386

-- --

e0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.7614

CF = 1.136672 - 0.041838[ln(hardness)] CF = 1.101672 - 0.041838[ln(hardness)]

CF = 0.316 CF = 0.860

CF = 0.96 CF = 0.96

CF = 1.46203 - 0.145712[ln(hardness)]

e0.846[ln(hardness)] + 1.1645

Hardness-dependent Water Quality Criteria Filtered Surface Water Conversion Factor

Chronic Acute Chronic

CF = 1.46203 - 0.145712[ln(hardness)]

e0.819[ln(hardness)] + 1.561

e0.8545[ln(hardness)] - 1.465

e1.273[ln(hardness)] - 4.705

CF = 1.46203 - 0.145712[ln(hardness)]

CF = 0.85

CF = 0.997CF = 0.986

--

CF = 1.101672 - 0.041838[ln(hardness)]

CF = 0.316CF = 0.982

CF = 0.96

CF = 0.860CF = 0.962

CF = 0.96

--

e0.8473[ln(hardness)] + 0.884

--

CF = 1.136672 - 0.041838[ln(hardness)]

CF = 1.46203 - 0.145712[ln(hardness)]

CF = 0.85

CF = 0.998

CF = 0.85

CF = 0.978

Chronic Acute Chronic

e0.7852[ln(hardness)] - 3.49

e0.7852[ln(hardness)] - 2.715

e0.819[ln(hardness)] + 0.6848

--

e0.8545[ln(hardness)] - 1.702

e1.273[ln(hardness)] - 4.705

e0.846[ln(hardness)] + 0.0584

Hardness-dependent Water Quality Criteria Filtered Surface Water Conversion Factor

4/22/2003: 9:27 AM 

005014
CASRN Constituentsa log Kow

TTLplantd,e 

(mg/kg)

TTLinvertebrated,e 

(mg/kg)

TRV c 

(mg/kg/day) Source / Te

SVOCs

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 5.503 0.0255 k 2,296 l 12 33 0.225 n/Coturn

Metals

7440-43-9 Cadmium -- 0.364 k 0.96 l 53 143 1.45 n/mallar

7440-47-3 Chromium -- 0.0075 k 0.01 l 36 97 1.00 o/black 

7440-50-8 Copper -- 0.40 k 0.04 l 2,021 5,390 47 n/1-day o

7439-92-1 Lead -- 0.045 k 0.03 l 1.38 3.67 0.025 n/ring tur

7439-97-6 Mercury -- 0.038 k 0.04 l 180 481 3.25 n/coturni

7440-02-0 Nickel -- 0.032 k 0.02 l 3,606 9,615 65 n/coturni

7782-49-2 Selenium -- 0.016 k 0.22 l 19 51 0.50 n /ma

7440-66-6 Zinc -- 0.358 o 0.56 l 4,434 11,825 131 n/leghorn hen and new 

TTL and SBV Equations:

Target Tissue Level (TTL)plant

Target Tissue Level (TTL)invertebrate

Screening Benchmark Value (SBV)soil

Value Units

Dietary Ingestion Rateg = 0.0169 kg/day

Soil Ingestion Rateh = 0.0018 kg/day

Plant Tissue Moisture = 68% unitless

Plant Tissue in Diet = 50% unitless

Invertebrate Tissue Moisture = 88% unitless

Invertebrate Tissue in Diet = 50% unitless

Temportal Use Factor i = 100% unitless

Site Use Factor i = 100% unitless

Tissue Bioavailability Ratio j = 100% unitless

Body Weight = 0.1500 kg

Target Hazard Quotient = 1.00 unitless

 Notes on Table:

a

b

c

d

e

f

 Notes on Exposure Factors:

g

h

ij

 Notes on Bioaccumulation Factors (BAFs):

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil—Northern Bobwhite

Table 4-4

 Tissue bioavailability ratio; default value is 100%. All concentrations of constituents in tissue expressed in wet weight. All concentrations of constituents in soil expressed in dry weight. Ingestion rate of prey expressed in dry weight. Ingestion rate of soil based on fraction of prey ingestion rate. Site use factor is an indication of how much the target receptor utilizes the site. Temporal use factor is an indication of migratory behavior.

BAFplantb BAFinvertebrateb

 TRVs for the bobwhite are primarily from EPA, 1999a; secondary sources include Sample et al., 1996. Exposure parameters used to calculate TTLs and SBVs are based on those described in EPA, 1999, Table 5-1. = BW x TRV x THQ / [(1-TMplant) x IRplant x TBR x SUF x TUF]

 = BW x TRV x THQ / [(1-TMinvert) x IRinvert x TBR x SUF x TUF]

 The plant and invertebrate BAFs are from EPA, 1999a. Constituents detected in soil were those considered to be bioaccumulative based on guidance outlined in Section 3.4 and Table 3-1 of TCEQ, 2000. = BW x TRV x THQ / [(1-TMplant) x IRplant x BAFplant + (1-TMinvert) x IRinvert x BAFinvert) + IRsoil] x SUF x TUF

4/22/2003: 9:27 AM 

005015
CASRN Constituentsa log Kow

TTLplantd,e 

(mg/kg)

TTLinvertebrated,e 

(mg/kg)

TRV c 

(mg/kg/day) Source / Te

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil—Northern Bobwhite

Table 4-4

BAFplantb BAFinvertebrateb

k Soil-to-soil invertebrate bioconcentration factor (mg/kg COPC/kg wet tissue)/(mg/kg COPC/kg dry wt soil) [EPA, 1999; Table C-1]. An 83.3% mois

l Soil-to-plant bioconcentration factors (mg COPC/kg dry tissue)/(mg COPC/kg dry soil) [EPA, 1999; Table C-2].

m Bechtel Jacobs Company, LLC (BJC). 1998. Empirical Models for the Uptake of Inorganic Chemicals from Soil by Plants. BJR/OR-133. Oak Ridg

 Notes on Toxicity Reference Values (TRVs):

n EPA (1999). Table E-7; mercury value based on mercuric chloride

o Sample et al., 1996; also source of test species body weights.

 Notes on Allometric Adjustments:

p Allometric Estimates of NOAEL (TNRCC, 2001).

 Allometric Equation: NOAELw = NOAELt [bwt/bww}(1-b)

where: NOAELw = NOAEL for avian or mammalian wildlife specues

 NOAELt = NOAEL for avian or mammalian test species

 bwt = body weight of avian or mammalian test species

 bww = body weight of avian or mammalian wildlife species

 b = allometric scaling factor specific to either birds (1.2) or mammals (0.94)

4/22/2003: 9:27 AM 

005016
CASRN Constituentsa Average Maximum Source / Test Species 

SVOCs

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene n,p,r,s 0.095 0.019 3.7 0.225 t/Coturnix quail 0.15 

Metals

7440-43-9 Cadmium 0.041 0.12 16 1.45 t/mallard drake 1.15 

7440-50-8 Copper 0.86 1.67 604 46.97 t/1-day old chick 0.534 

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.203 0.52 53.8 3.25 t/coturnix quail 0.15 7440-02-0 Nickel 0.00978 0.032 1,077 65 t/coturnix quail 0.15 

7782-49-2 Seleniumq 0.899 1.17 5.7 0.50 t /mallard 1.00 

7440-66-6 Zinc 0.23 0.74 1,324.5 130.90 t/leghorn hen and new hampshire rooster 1.766 

Organometals

688-73-3 Tributyltino 31.5 66.8 113 6.8 u/Japanese quail 0.15 

TTL and SBV Equations:

TTLinvert = BW x TRV x HQ / [(1-TM1) x IRinvert x SUF x TUF]

SBVsed = BW x TRV x HQ / [((1-TM1) x IRinvert x (BSAFinvert x Flipid/Foc)+ IRsed) x SUF x TUF]SBVsed =

Value Units

IRinvertg = 0.0072 kg/day

IRsedh = 0.0017 kg/day

Invertebrate Tissue Moisture i = 74% unitless

Total Organic Carbon j = 1.3% unitless

Invertebrate Tissue Lipid k = 7.0% unitless

Invertebrate Tissue in Diet = 100% unitless

TUF l = 100% unitless

SUF l = 100% unitless

Tissue Bioavailability Ratiom = 100% unitless

Body Weight = 0.04 kg

Hazard Quotient = 1.00 unitless

 Notes on Table:

 a List of constituents based on the criteria for identifying bioaccumulative chemicals in sediment as outlined in State of Texas Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance, Section 3.

b Biota-sediment accumulation factors (BSAFs) for invertebrates were based on average and maximum values derived for crustaceans that were available for co-located sedime

c TRVs for the sandpiper are primarily from EPA, 1999; Secondary sources include Sample et al., 1996.

d Exposure parameters used to calculate target tissue levels (TTLs) and screening benchmark values (SBVs) are based on those described in EPA, 1999, Table 5-1.

e All concentrations of constituents in tissue expressed in wet weight.

f All concentrations of constituents in sediment expressed in dry weight.

 Notes on Exposure Factors:

g Ingestion rate of invertebrates expressed in dry weight.h Ingestion rate of sediment based on fraction of prey ingestion rate.

i Tissue moisture was based on an average of limited data that was sampled for fiddler crab from the Calcasieu Estuary Investigation - EPA Phase 2 Study data.j Total organic carbon came from the State Marine database and was derived using an average of all the TOC collected from the off-site area.

k Invertebrate tissue lipids came from a literature based value cited in EPA, 1999 in lieu of site-specific lipid data.

l Site use factor is an indication of how much the target receptor utilizes the site. Temporal use factor is an indication of migratory behavior.

m Tissue bioavailability ratio (TBR); default is 100%.

 Notes on Calcasieu Estuary Derived Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (see also Table 4-10):

n 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene was used as a chlorinated-organic surrogate for deriving a BSAF for hexachlorobenzene; the BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was derived by 

o Methyl mercury was used as an organo-metalic surrogate for deriving a BSAF for tributyltin; the BSAF for methyl mercury was dervied without normalizing to percent lipid a

p Derivation of the BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was based on a ratio of the average of sediment results from the 1999 Conoco Bayou Verdine Investigation and an aver

q Derivation of the BSAF for selenium was based on a ratio of the average of sediment results and the average and maximum crustacean tissue results in the absence of specific 

r TOC was derived using an average of all available data from the Calcasieu Estuary Initiative in the absence of EPA Phase 2 Investigation data.

s Lipid was derived using an average or maximum of all species of crustaceans that were available for lipids from the Calcasieu Estuary Initiative database in the absence of spe

 Notes on Toxicity Reference Values (TRVs):

t Table E-8, EPA (1999). Total mercury value based on mercuric chloride.

u Sample et al., 1996; also source of test species body weights.

 Notes on Allometric Adjustments:

v Allometric Estimates of NOAEL (TCEQ, 2001).

 Allometric Equation: NOAELw = NOAELt [bwt/bww}(1-b)

where: NOAELw = NOAEL for avian or mammalian wildlife specues

 NOAELt = NOAEL for avian or mammalian test species

 bwt = body weight of avian or mammalian test species

 bww = body weight of avian or mammalian wildlife species

 b = allometric scaling factor specific to either birds (1.2) or mammals (0.94)

Table 4-5

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Sediment—Spotted Sandpiper

TTLtissue x Foc / (BSAF x Flipid)

TRV c 

(mg/kg/day)

BSAFinvertebrate b Body weight - test speciesu 

(kg)

TTLinvertebrated,e 

(mg/kg)

4/22/2003: 9:36 AM 

005017
CASRN Constituentsa Average Maximum 

SVOCs

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzenen,p,r,s 0.053 0.24 4 0.23 t/Coturnix quail 0.15 0.2244 

Metals

7440-43-9 Cadmium 0.030 0.53 16 1.5 t/mallard drake 1.15 0.962 

7440-50-8 Copper 0.097 1.13 598 47 t/1-day old chick 0.534 36.34 

7439-97-6 Mercury 0.57 3.23 53 3.3 t/coturnix quail 0.15 3.241 

7440-02-0 Nickel 0.0087 0.054 1,066 65 t/coturnix quail 0.15 64.83 

7782-49-2 Selenium 0.70 1.23 6 0.50 t /mallard 1.00 0.3 

7440-66-6 Zinc 0.28 1.14 1,311 131 t/leghorn hen and new hampshire rooster 1.766 79.72 

Organometals

688-73-3 Tributyltino,q 14 20 112 6.8 u/Japanese quail 0.15 6.8 

TTL and SBV Equations:

TTLfish = BW x TRV x HQ / [(1-TM1) x IRfish x SUF x TUF]

SBVsed = BW x TRV x HQ / [((1-TM1) x IRfish x (BSAFfish x Flipid/Foc) + IRsed) x SUF x TUF]

SBVsed =

Value

IRfishg = 0.075 kg/day

IRsedimenth = 0.0008 kg/day

Fish Tissue Moisture i = 88% unitless

Total Organic Carbon j = 1.3% unitless

Fish Tissue Lipid k = 7.0% unitless

Fish Tissue in Diet = 100% unitless

TUF l = 100% unitless

SUF l = 100% unitless

Tissue Bioavailability Ratiom = 100% unitless

Body Weight = 0.148 kg

Hazard Quotient = 1.00 unitless

 Notes on Table:

a List of constituents based on the criteria for identifying bioaccumulative chemicals in sediment as outlined in State of Texas Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance, Section 3.4, Table 3

b BSAFs for fish were based on an average of data obtained for multiple species of fish available from the Calcasieu Estuary Study, EPA Phase 2 Investigation; all data was downloaded 

c TRVs for the kingfisher are primarily from EPA, 1999; Secondary sources include Sample et al., 1996.

d Exposure parameters used to calculate TTLs and SBVs are based on those described in EPA, 1999, Table 5-1.

e All concentrations of constituents in tissue expressed in wet weight.

f All concentrations of constituents in sediment expressed in dry weight.

 Notes on Exposure Factors:

g Ingestion rate of prey expressed in dry weight.

h Ingestion rate of sediment based on 1% of the prey ingestion rate.

i Tissue moisture for fish came from the literature cited in EPA (1999) in lieu of site-specific moisture data.j Organic carbon from the State Marine database and was derived using an average of all the TOC collected from the off-site area.

k Fish tissue lipids came from literature cited in EPA (1999) in lieu of site-specific lipid data.

l Site use factor is an indication of how much the target receptor utilizes the site. Temporal use factor is an indication of migratory behavior.

m Tissue bioavailability ratio (TBR); default is 100%.

 Notes on the Calcasieu Estuary Derived Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (see also Table 4-9):

n 1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene was used as an chlorinated organic surrogate for deriving a BSAF for hexachlorobenzene; the BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was derived by normali

o Methyl mercury was used as an organo-metalic surrogate for deriving a BSAF for tributyltin.p Derivation of the BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was derived using an average of sediment results from the 1999 Conoco Bayou Verdine Investigation and an average of all fish t

q The BSAF for methyl mercury was dervied using crustacean data in the absence of data for fish and without normalizing to percent lipid and total organic carbon.

r TOC results were based on an average of all available data from the Calcasieu Estuary Initiative in the absence of EPA Phase 2 Investigation data .

s Lipid results were based on an average of multiple species of fish that were analyzed for lipids; lipid data came from the EPA Phase 2 Investigation.

 Notes on Toxicity Reference Values (TRVs):

t Table E-8, EPA (1999). Total mercury value based on mercuric chloride.

u Sample et al., 1996; also source of test species body weights.

 Notes on Allometric Adjustments:

v Allometric Estimates of NOAEL (TCEQ, 2001).

 Allometric Equation: NOAELw = NOAELt [bwt/bww}(1-b)

where: NOAELw = NOAEL for avian or mammalian wildlife specues

 NOAELt = NOAEL for avian or mammalian test species

 bwt = body weight of avian or mammalian test species

 bww = body weight of avian or mammalian wildlife species

 b = allometric scaling factor specific to either birds (1.2) or mammals (0.94)

Table 4-6

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Sediment—Belted Kingfisher

Body weight -

test speciesu 

(kg)

Allometric 

TRV v 

(mg/kg/day)

Source / Test Species

TTLtissue x Foc / (BSAF x Flipid)

BSAFfish b TTLfishd,e 

(mg/kg)

TRV c 

(mg/kg/day)

4/22/2003: 9:28 AM 

005018
CASRN Constituentsa log Kow

TTLplantd,e 

(mg/kg)

TTLinvertd,e 

(mg/kg)

TRV c 

(mg/kg/day) So

SVOCs

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 5.5 0.0255 k 2,296 l 23 61 1.6 

Metals

7440-43-9 Cadmium -- 0.364 k 0.96 l 0.31 0.83 0.025 

7440-47-3 Chromium -- 0.0075 k 0.01 l 39,148 104,394 2,737 7440-50-8 Copper -- 0.40 k 0.04 l 183 487 12 

7439-92-1 Lead -- 0.045 k 0.03 l 0.46 1.23 0.038 

7439-97-6 Mercury -- 0.038 k 0.04 l 15 41 1 

7440-02-0 Nickel -- 0.032 k 0.02 l 715 1,907 50 

7782-49-2 Selenium -- 0.016 k 0.22 l 0.94 2.5 0.076 

7440-66-6 Zinc -- 0.36 o 0.56 l 128 342 10 

TTL and SBV Equations:

Target Tissue Level (TTL)plant

Target Tissue Level (TTL)invertebrate

Screening Benchmark Value (SBV)soil

Value Units

Dietary Ingestion Rateg = 0.0006 kg/day

Soil Ingestion Rateh = 0.0000027 kg/day

Plant Tissue Moisture = 68% unitless

Plant Tissue in Diet = 50% unitless

Invertebrate Tissue Moisture = 88% unitless

Invertebrate Tissue in Diet = 50% unitless

Temportal Use Factor i = 100% unitless

Site Use Factor i = 100% unitless

Tissue Bioavailability Ratio j = 100% unitless

Body Weight = 0.0010 kg

Target Hazard Quotient = 1.00 unitless

 Notes on Table:

a

b

c

d

e

f

 Notes on Exposure Factors:

g

h

ij

Table 4-7

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil—White-footed Mouse

 Exposure parameters used to calculate TTLs and SBVs are based on those described in EPA, 1999, Table 5-1. Tissue bioavailability ratio; default value is 100%. All concentrations of constituents in tissue expressed in wet weight. All concentrations of constituents in soil expressed in dry weight. Ingestion rate of prey expressed in dry weight. Ingestion rate of soil based on fraction of prey ingestion rate. Site use factor is an indication of how much the target receptor utilizes the site. Temporal use factor is an indication of migratory behavior

BAFplantb BAFinvertebrate b

 TRVs for the bobwhite are primarily from EPA, 1999a; secondary sources include Sample et al., 1996. = BW x TRV x THQ / [(1-TMplant) x IRplant x TBR x SUF x TUF]

 = BW x TRV x THQ / [(1-TMinvert) x IRinvert x TBR x SUF x TUF]

 Constituents detected in soil were those considered to be bioaccumulative based on guidance as outlined in State of Texas Ecological Risk  The plant and invertebrate BAFs are from EPA, 1999a. = BW x TRV x THQ / [(1-TMplant) x IRplant x BAFplant + (1-TMinvert) x IRinvert x BAFinvert) + IRsoil] x SUF x TUF

4/22/2003: 9:29 AM 

005019
CASRN Constituentsa log Kow

TTLplantd,e 

(mg/kg)

TTLinvertd,e 

(mg/kg)

TRV c 

(mg/kg/day) So

Table 4-7

Ecological Screening Benchmark Values for Soil—White-footed Mouse

BAFplantb BAFinvertebrate b

 Notes on Bioaccumulation Factors (BAFs):

k Soil-to-soil invertebrate bioconcentration factor (mg/kg COPC/kg wet tissue)/(mg/kg COPC/kg dry wt soil) [EPA, 1999; Table C-1]. An 8

l Soil-to-plant bioconcentration factors (mg COPC/kg dry tissue)/(mg COPC/kg dry soil) [EPA, 1999; Table C-2].

m LLC (BJC). 1998. Empirical Models for the Uptake of Inorganic Chemicals from Soil by Plants. BJR/OR-133. Oak Ridge National Labora

 Notes on Toxicity Reference Values (TRVs):

n EPA (1999). Table E-7; mercury value based on mercuric chloride

o Sample et al., 1996; also source of test species body weights.

 Notes on Allometric Adjustments:

p Allometric Estimates of NOAEL (TNRCC, 2001).

 Allometric Equation: NOAELw = NOAELt [bwt/bww}(1-b)

where: NOAELw = NOAEL for avian or mammalian wildlife specues

 NOAELt = NOAEL for avian or mammalian test species

 bwt = body weight of avian or mammalian test species

 bww = body weight of avian or mammalian wildlife species

 b = allometric scaling factor specific to either birds (1.2) or mammals (0.94)

4/22/2003: 9:29 AM 

005020
CASRN Constituentsa White-footed Mouse Northern Bobwhite Belted Kingfisher 

SVOCs

118-74-1 Hexachlorobenzene 0.027 0.014 2.70 

Metals

7440-43-9 Cadmium 0.41 38.5 26 7440-47-3 Chromium 1018839 53.6 NA 7440-50-8 Copper 413 1870 494 

7439-92-1 Lead 5.55 1.91 NA 

7439-97-6 Mercury 193 251 16 

7440-02-0 Nickel 10726 5113 7752 7782-49-2 Selenium 7.46 24.8 4.27 7440-66-6 Zinc 215 3595 1069 

Organometals

688-73-3 Tributyltin NA NA 5.5 

Notes:

a List of constituents was based on the criteria for identifying bioaccumulative chemicals in soils and/or sediments as outlined in State of Texas Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance, Secb Food-chain benchmark values for the Northern Bobwhite and White-footed Mouse were developed as site-specific screening values for bioaccumulative constituents detected in upland ac Food-chain benchmark values for the Spotted Sandpiper and Belted Kingfisher were developed as site-specific screening levels for bioaccumulative constituents detected in off-site sedim

NA = Not applicable as a bioaccumlative constituent for this media (TCEQ, 2001).

Soil (mg/kg) b

Table 4-8

Summary of Wildlife Food-Chain Benchmarks for Bioaccumulative Constituents in Soil and Sediment

Sediment 

Ecological SBVs.xls: Table 4-8 

005021
Constituent Units Sediment Tissue BSAF Tissue BSAF Spec

Co-Located DataCadmium mg/kg 2.19E-01 4.86E-03 3.04E-02 9.00E-02 5.29E-01 Killifis

Copper mg/kg 4.74E+01 2.18E+00 9.67E-02 1.74E+01 1.13E+00 Mul

Mercury mg/kg 7.10E-01 1.06E-01 5.67E-01 5.85E-01 3.23E+00 Red D

Nickel mg/kg 1.72E+01 1.17E-01 8.68E-03 4.70E-01 5.42E-02 Gizzard Selenium mg/kg 1.10E+00 5.85E-01 6.97E-01 1.70E+00 1.23E+00 Mangrove Zinc mg/kg 9.60E+01 2.00E+01 2.77E-01 6.79E+01 1.14E+00 KillifisMethyl Mercury μg/kg 4.39E+00 NA -- NA -- --

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/kg NA NA -- NA -- --

Lipids % -- 2.73E+00 -- 1.45E+01 -- Sailfin M

Moisture % -- NA -- NA -- --

Total Organic Carbon % NA -- -- -- -- --2000 EPA Phase 2 DataCadmium mg/kg 2.40E-01 4.08E-03 1.70E-02 1.50E-02 6.25E-02 ThreadfiCopper mg/kg 5.13E+01 1.88E+00 3.66E-02 6.65E+00 1.30E-01 Sheepshead 

Mercury mg/kg 7.22E-01 8.11E-02 1.12E-01 1.88E-01 2.60E-01 Spotted S

Nickel mg/kg 1.74E+01 1.15E-01 6.60E-03 2.93E-01 1.69E-02 Gulf Men

Selenium mg/kg 6.34E-01 6.92E-01 1.09E+00 1.70E+00 2.68E+00 Mangrove 

Zinc mg/kg 1.28E+02 1.90E+01 1.48E-01 3.58E+01 2.80E-01 Bay Anc

Methyl Mercury μg/kg 2.42E+00 NA -- NA -- --

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/kg NA NA -- NA -- --

Lipids % -- 3.57E+00 -- 1.45E+01 -- Sailfin M

Moisture % -- NA -- NA -- --

Total Organic Carbon % -- -- -- -- -- --Calcasieu Investigation DataCadmium mg/kg 5.52E-01 5.64E-03 1.02E-02 9.00E-02 1.63E-01 Killifish Copper mg/kg 5.86E+01 2.00E+00 3.41E-02 1.74E+01 2.97E-01 Sheepshead 

Mercury mg/kg 9.47E-01 1.06E-01 1.12E-01 7.81E-01 8.25E-01 Spotted S

Nickel mg/kg 1.67E+01 1.16E-01 6.95E-03 4.70E-01 2.81E-02 Gizzard Selenium mg/kg 1.02E+00 5.84E-01 5.73E-01 1.70E+00 1.67E+00 Mangrove Zinc mg/kg 1.53E+02 2.04E+01 1.33E-01 6.79E+01 4.44E-01 Killifis

Methyl Mercury μg/kg 2.42E+00 NA -- NA -- --

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/kg 6.07E+02 1.40E+01 5.35E-02 5.32E+02 2.39E-01 Blue C

Lipids % -- 1.77E+00 -- 1.51E+01 -- Channel Moisture % -- NA -- -- -- --

Total Organic Carbon % 4.11E+00 -- -- -- -- --

Notes:Co-located BSAFs were derived by taking the ratio of tissue and sediment for each unique station and then taking the average or maximum BSAF of those ratios.BSAFs for the 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation data were derived by taking the ratio of the average or the maximum of the tissue for each species sampled and the average of all the Phase 2 sediments.BSAFs for the Calcasieu Investigation data were derived by taking the ratio of the average or the maximum of tissues for each species sampled and the overall average of sediments from the entire database.Fish tissue data was not available for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene from co-located stations nor from the 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation.The BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was derived using an average of sediment results from the 1999 Conoco Bayou Verdine Investigation and an average of fish tissue results from the entire Calcasieu Estuary Initiative database.The BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was derived by normalizing to percent lipid and TOC.Methyl mercury was not analyzed in fish tissues.TOC content was not analyzed in sediment at any of the co-located stations nor as part of the 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation; TOC was based on an average of data from the Calcasieu Estuary Investigation database.Percent lipid was based on multiple fish species from co-located stations as well as other investigation data within the Calcasieu Estuary Initiative database.Percent moisture was not analyzed for in fish tissues.NA = Sediment and/or tissue results were not presented in the Calcasieu Estuary Investigation database for these constituents.-- = Indicates that the parameter could not be calculated due to a lack of available data.

Table 4-9

Average Results Maximum Results

Calculation of Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (BSAFs) for Fish Tissues

Tables 4-9 and 4-10: Ecological SBVs.xls 

005022
Constituent Units Sediment Tissue BSAF Tissue BSAF Spec

Co-Located DataCopper mg/kg 1.91E+01 1.29E+01 8.60E-01 1.68E+01 1.67E+00 Penaeid S

Cadmium mg/kg 2.15E-01 6.77E-03 4.05E-02 2.00E-02 1.18E-01 Penaeid S

Mercury mg/kg 1.63E-01 1.89E-02 2.03E-01 3.53E-02 5.23E-01 Penaeid S

Nickel mg/kg 1.76E+01 1.52E-01 9.78E-03 3.10E-01 3.21E-02 Penaeid SSelenium mg/kg NA 4.74E-01 -- 8.30E-01 -- --

Zinc mg/kg 1.06E+02 1.48E+01 2.31E-01 3.20E+01 7.44E-01 Penaeid S

Methyl Mercury μg/kg 6.01E-01 1.73E+01 3.15E+01 3.25E+01 6.68E+01 Penaeid S

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/kg NA NA -- NA -- --

Lipids % -- 1.71E+00 -- 2.38E+00 -- Penaeid S

Moisture % -- NA -- NA -- --

Total Organic Carbon % NA -- -- -- -- --2000 EPA Phase 2 DataCadmium mg/kg 2.40E-01 4.06E-02 1.69E-01 8.16E-02 3.40E-01 Fiddler 

Copper mg/kg 5.13E+01 1.64E+01 3.21E-01 2.78E+01 5.43E-01 Fiddler 

Mercury mg/kg 7.22E-01 5.71E-02 7.91E-02 8.78E-02 1.22E-01 Blue C

Nickel mg/kg 1.74E+01 2.36E-01 1.36E-02 4.62E-01 2.66E-02 Fiddler 

Selenium mg/kg 6.34E-01 5.70E-01 8.99E-01 7.43E-01 1.17E+00 Blue C

Zinc mg/kg 1.28E+02 1.98E+01 1.55E-01 2.63E+01 2.05E-01 Blue C

Methyl Mercury μg/kg 2.42E+00 3.35E+01 1.38E+01 4.93E+01 2.03E+01 Fiddler 

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/kg NA NA -- NA -- --

Lipids % -- 2.24E+00 -- 4.03E+00 -- Blue CMoisture % -- 7.43E+01 -- 7.75E+01 -- Fiddler 

Total Organic Carbon % NA -- -- -- -- --Calcasieu Investigation DataCadmium mg/kg 5.52E-01 3.40E-02 6.17E-02 8.16E-02 1.48E-01 Fiddler 

Copper mg/kg 5.86E+01 1.65E+01 2.83E-01 2.78E+01 4.75E-01 Fiddler 

Mercury mg/kg 9.47E-01 5.03E-02 5.31E-02 1.31E-01 1.39E-01 Blue C

Nickel mg/kg 1.67E+01 2.36E-01 1.41E-02 4.62E-01 2.76E-02 Fiddler 

Selenium mg/kg 1.02E+00 5.70E-01 5.59E-01 7.43E-01 7.30E-01 Blue C

Zinc mg/kg 1.53E+02 1.88E+01 1.23E-01 2.63E+01 1.72E-01 Blue C

Methyl Mercury μg/kg 2.42E+00 3.35E+01 1.38E+01 4.93E+01 2.03E+01 Fiddler 

1,2,4,5-Tetrachlorobenzene μg/kg 6.07E+02 1.12E+01 9.50E-02 2.72E+01 1.90E-02 Blue C

Lipids % -- 1.25E+00 -- 1.75E+00 -- Penaeid S

Moisture % -- 7.43E+01 -- 7.75E+01 -- Fiddler 

Total Organic Carbon % 4.11E+00 -- -- -- -- --

Notes:Co-located BSAFs were derived by taking the ratio of tissue and sediment for each unique station and then taking the average or maximum BSAF of those ratios.BSAFs for the 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation data were derived by taking the ratio of the average or the maximum of the tissue for each species sampled and the average of all the Phase 2 sediments.BSAFs for the Calcasieu Investigation data were derived by taking the ratio of the average or the maximum of tissues for each species sampled and the overall average of sediments from the entire database.Derivation of the BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was based on an average of sediment results from the 1999 Conoco Bayou Verdine Investigation and an average of crustacean tissue results from the entire Calcasieu Estuary Initiative database.The BSAF for 1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene was derived by normalizing to percent lipid and TOC.The BSAF for methyl mercury was dervied without normalizing to percent lipid and TOC.TOC content was not analyzed in sediment at any of the co-located stations nor as part of the 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation; TOC was based on an average of data from the Calcasieu Estuary Investigation database.Percent lipid results for co-located data were based on samples of penaeid shrimp; for 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation data percent lipid results were based on samples of penaeid shrimp, fiddler crab, and blue crab.Percent moisture was based on an average of limited data that was sampled only from fiddler crab as part of the 2000 EPA Phase 2 Investigation.Invertebrate tissue concentrations for methyl mercury represent an average of limited data that was sampled only during the EPA Phase 2 Investigation using the following crustaceans: penaeid shrimp, fiddler crab, and blue crab.NA = Sediment and/or tissue results were not presented in the Calcasieu Estuary Investigation database for these constituents.-- = Indicates that the parameter could not be calculated due to a lack of available data.

Average Results Maximum Results

Calculation of Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (BSAFs) for Invertebrate Tissues

Table 4-10

Tables 4-9 and 4-10: Ecological SBVs.xls 

005023
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

5-1

5. CHARACTERIZATION OF RISK SCREENING 

The characterization of risk screening identifies the magnitude and frequency by which 

measurement receptors are exposed to COPEC that have migrated or may potentially migrate 

through various exposure pathways to the ecological habitat on and adjacent to the SMS Site. 

This involves comparison of site-specific levels of constituents present in environmental media 

and food sources to levels considered to be protective of environmental receptors including sitespecific quantification of the levels of constituents that may be entering wildlife measurement 

receptor through bioaccumulation in the food-chain (i.e., Wildlife Food-Chain Benchmarks). 

5.1 SUMMARY OF RESULTS 

This section contains both a statistical summary of the soil, sediment, and groundwater analytical 

results as sampled at the SMS Site and a comparison of screening benchmarks and background 

screening values to average and maximum site concentrations. The primary objective of this 

discussion is to summarize the location and extent of contamination while determining whether 

there is a current or potential future risk to ecological receptors. 

5.1.1 Soil 

The soil investigation was conducted across the entire site in order to determine the extent of soil 

contamination associated with identified source and nonsource areas. The source areas for soil 

included the following areas: Wastewater Impoundment, Wastewater Treatment Facility, Current 

Aboveground Storage Tank (AST), Maintenance Shed, Tar Burn, and the Lauren Refining 

Company Tank Farm. All soil samples were analyzed for base/neutral/acid (BNAs) and metals. 

The average and maximum concentrations for each detected constituent were compared to 

literature-based screening benchmarks (the lowest values that were available from TCEQ, EPA, 

ORNL, and Friday [1998], risk-based food-chain benchmarks for wildlife, and the EPA Region 6 

Medium-Specific Screening Levels [MSSLs]. Nonrisk-based screening levels for background 

were also compared to average and maximum detected concentrations. Risk-based benchmark 

and background screening value comparison results are summarized in the following paragraphs 

005024
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF RISK SCREENING 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

5-2

and are presented in detail in the referenced tables. A complete summary of COPEC for all 

media at the SMS Site, including the soils, is presented in Table 5-17. 

5.1.1.1 Wastewater Impoundment Area 

The complete soil screening results for the Wastewater Impoundment Area are presented in 

Table 5-1. The COPEC identified within the Wastewater Impoundment Area is presented below. 

Average and/or maximum detected concentrations that exceeded their SBVs can be summarized 

from Table 5-1 as follows: 

Maximum and Average Maximum Only Average Only 

Anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene 

Benzo(a)pyrene Chrysene 

Benzo(b)fluoranthene 

Fluoranthene 

Naphthalene 

Phenanthrene 

Pyrene 

Aluminum 

Antimony 

Arsenic 

Barium 

Beryllium 

Cadmium* 

Chromium 

Copper 

Iron 

Lead* 

Manganese 

Mercury 

Nickel 

Silver 

Vanadium 

Zinc* 

Literature-based SBVs were exceeded by multiple constituents for average and/or maximum 

concentrations including nine BNAs and sixteen metals. There were no constituents in which the 

average was the only concentration exceeding a benchmark. 

005025
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF RISK SCREENING 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

5-3

Cadmium, lead, and zinc showed concentrations that exceeded Wildlife Food-Chain Benchmarks 

for the Northern bobwhite and/or the white-footed mouse as identified above with an asterisk (*). 

A total of 13 constituents including nine BNAs and four metals (all essential nutrients) did not 

have ecological benchmarks from which to compare detected surface soil concentrations in the 

Wastewater Impoundment Area. 

EPA Region 6 and TCEQ background soil screening values were exceeded by numerous metals 

in the Wastewater Impoundment Area. Seventeen metals also exceeded site-specific background 

screening values. 

5.1.1.2 Wastewater Treatment Facility 

The complete soil screening results for the Wastewater Treatment Facility are presented in Table 

5-2. COPECs that were identified within the Wastewater Treatment Facility are presented 

below. Average and/or maximum detected concentrations for COPEC that exceeded their SBVs 

can be summarized from Table 5-2 as follows: 

Maximum and Average Maximum Only Average Only 

Anthracene Chrysene 

Benzo(a)pyrene 

Fluoranthene 

Naphthalene 

Phenanthrene 

Pyrene 

Aluminum 

Antimony 

Arsenic 

Barium 

Beryllium 

Cadmium* 

Chromium 

Cobalt 

Copper 

Iron 

Lead* 

Manganese 

Mercury 

Nickel 

Selenium 

005026
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF RISK SCREENING 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

5-4

Maximum and Average Maximum Only Average Only 

Silver 

Thallium 

Vanadium 

Zinc* 

Literature-based SBVs were exceeded by multiple constituents for average and/or maximum 

concentrations including seven BNAs and eighteen metals. There were no constituents in which 

the average was the only concentration exceeding a benchmark. 

Cadmium, lead, and zinc showed concentrations that exceeded Wildlife Food-Chain Benchmarks 

for the Northern bobwhite and/or the white-footed mouse as identified above with an asterisk (*). 

Twelve constituents, eight BNAs and four metals (all essential nutrients), did not have ecological 

benchmarks from which to compare detected surface soil concentrations in the Wastewater 

Treatment Facility Area. 

EPA Region 6 and TCEQ background soil screening values were exceeded by numerous metals 

within the Wastewater Treatment Facility. Seventeen metals also exceeded site-specific 

background area screening values. 

5.1.1.3 Current AST Area 

The complete soil screening results for the Current AST Area are presented in Table 5-3. 

COPECs that were identified at the Current AST Area are summarized below. Average and/or 

maximum detected concentrations that exceeded their SBVs can be summarized from Table 5-3 

as follows: 

Maximum and Average Maximum Only Average Only 

Anthracene Benzo(a)anthracene Naphthalene 

Benzo(a)pyrene Benzo(b)fluoranthene 

Fluoranthene Benzo(k)fluoranthene 

Pentachlorophenol Chrysene 

Phenanthrene Nickel 

Pyrene 

Aluminum 

Antimony 

Arsenic 

Barium 

005027
Weston Solutions, Inc. – Final Ecological Screening Risk Assessment 

CHARACTERIZATION OF RISK SCREENING 

H:\STATE MARINE\RI REPORT (FINAL)\APPENDIX D (ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT)\TEXT\ECORA.DOC 5/8/03 

5-5

Maximum and Average Maximum Only Average Only 

Beryllium 

Cadmium* 

Chromium* 

Copper 

Iron 

Lead* 

Manganese 

Mercury 

Silver 

Vanadium 

Zinc* 

Literature-based SBVs were exceeded by multiple constituents for average and/or maximum 

concentrations including eleven BNAs and sixteen metals. 

Cadmium, chromium, lead, and zinc had concentrations that exceeded their respective Wildlife 

Food-Chain Benchmarks for the Northern bobwhite and/or the white-footed mouse as identified 

above with an asterisk (*). Twelve constituents, eight BNAs and four metals (all essential 

nutrients), did not have ecological benchmarks from which to compare detected surface soil 

concentrations in the Current AST Area. 

EPA Region 6 and TCEQ background soil screening values were exceeded by numerous metals 

within the Current AST Area. Fourteen metals also exceeded site-specific background area 

screening values. 

5.1.1.4 Maintenance Shed Area 

The complete soil screening results for the Maintenance Shed Area are presented in Table 5-4. 

COPECs that were identified within the Maintenance Shed Area are presented below. Average 

and/or maximum detected concentrations for COPECs that exceeded their SBVs can be 

summarized from Table 5-4 as follows: 

Maximum and Average Maximum Only Average Only 

Anthracene Naphthalene 

Benzo(a)pyrene 

Fluoranthene 

Phenanthrene 

005028