Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature: Project No.: 0172.08.005.607 Page 1 of 2

Project Name: 2011 Prelim Cat Rev 

### CBI?

Yes

No TELEPHONE CALL RECORD Incoming Outgoing Date: 05/10/11 Time: 11:00 am

pm

Company Name: GB Biosciences ERG Staff Name: Kimberly Landick

Contact Name: Kathleen Cameron Contact Phone Number: (713) 450-6518

General Subject: 2009 TRI PCB Discharges



### TOPICS DISCUSSED AND ACTION TAKEN

On May 10, 2011 at 11am I called Kathleen Cameron and left a message.

On May 12, 2011 at 3pm I called Kathl een Cameron and left a message.

On May 19, 2011 at 11:30am I called Kathleen Cameron. She answered and told me that Stephanie King was the person to call (713-450-6008). Ms. Ca meron also stated that she had gi ven my information to Ms. King and that she should be getting back to me shortly.

On May 23, 2011 at 9:30am, Stephanie King returned my call and asked what data I was looking to verify. I explained that the PCB discharges reported to TRI in 2009 had been much higher than previous years. I explained that we need to verify this discharge and gather information as to why it is high. She told me that she would gather the information and get back to me.

On May 23, 2011 at 10:30am, Stephanie King called me b ack and stated that the University of Houston did a study in 2009 at their facility. The f acility accepted the results from the st udy and reported those values to TRI. She needed to verify some of the information though and look for a copy of the report so she told me that she would call me back again.

On May 23, 2011 at 1pm, Stephanie King called me back. She stated that they couldn’t find a copy of the report but that she was going to contact the University of Houston to get a copy. She took my email address and said she will email me an electronic copy wh en she gets the report. Ms. King also explained that their facility is required to measure the PCB concentration once per year and that their 2009 results were non-detect. When the University of Houston did the study they took a sample sometime in August or September of 2009. Their result showed a PCB discharge of 0.71 nanograms/L. The facili ty took this number and multiplied it by their total annual flow and reported that value to TRI. Therefore, this value is most likely an overestimate for the year. The facility’s main product is Chlorophe nol and a byproduct is PCBs. These ar e usually found in the sludge at the facility and disposed of offsite. Th e facility has a long history of non-de tect readings of PCBs. In 2009 when the University of Houston came and sampled, the facility felt like they needed to report that value even when their sample came back non-detect. Ms King told me that she would email me the repo rt and I told her I’d let her know if we have any further questions.

On May 27, 2011 at 10:30am I called Stephanie King back. I asked her if they had taken a sample at the same time that the University of Houston had sampled. She said that she is not sure if they took one at the exact same time and will need to pull the data. She was confident th at they had at least pulled a sample within the same quarter of the study. Ms. King also stated that she be lieves the University of Houston had used a differentNeed to return call by / at/between and . Signature: sampling protocol than the facility uses and that sh e will check the methodology when she receives the report. The facility uses EPA protocols whic h the study probably didn’t use since it was for research purposes. I asked Ms. King if the samples had been taken at the same loca tion and if there had been an y change in operation over the last few years. She confirmed that the samples had been taken at the same lo cation and that the operation had stayed the same. She mentioned that the faci lity was shut down in 2010 for 6 months due to low international demand but they are now back to their re gular schedule. Ms. King also confirmed that she will send me the University of Houston report as soon as she receives it.

On June 6, 2011 at 11:51am, Stephanie King left me a message stating that she will be emailing me the analytical data that they pulled fo r the outfall for 2009. They found that all 11 of their samples were non-detect and the sampling methods were based on EPA methodol ogy. She also asked how she could go about revising their TRI discharge for 2009.

On June 7, 2011 at 11:42am, I returned Stephanie King’s call and left a message asking for her to call me back.

On June 10, 2011 at 12:37pm, I returned Stephanie King’s call and left a message asking for her to call me

back.

On June 14, 2011 at 4:20pm, I called Stephanie King. I e xplained to her that she can revise TRI data through

the EPA TRI office and to search on the EPA website for mo re information. She stated that she has not received the University of Houston report yet but that she will ema il me the University contacts so that I can try to get the report directly from them. Ms. King stated that she has also requested all of the 2009 PCB data from their lab but has only received July and August so far. Their permit requires them to do semi-annual sampling for PCBs so they typically only have 2 samples per year. However, in the 2 nd and 3 rd quarters of 2009 they were going through permit renewal so there are more sampling events than normal (four throughout July and August 2009). I also requested the data for 2010 and Ms. King stated that she wi ll ask the lab to send it. She also confirmed that outfall 001 is the main plant outfall; outfa ll 101 is an internal outfa ll located right before outfall 001, and outfall 002 is a storm water outfall (which discharg es to Harris County Ditch). Ms. King believed that the University of Houston study sample d outfall 001, which is the same outfa ll that the facility measures for

PCBs. She stated that she will email me more information about the Universi ty of Houston contacts and the lab results shortly.

On June 23, 2011 at 1:06pm, I called Stephanie King and le ft her a message. At 1:45pm she returned my call. She stated that she was still trying to get the 2009 data fr om the lab and should have it to us by the end of the week or early next week. Ms. King stated that they have not been able to get in t ouch with the University of Houston to obtain a copy of the stud y. She gave me the contact information for a professor at the University.

The name is Hanadirifai and the number is 713-743- 4271. Ms. King also asked if we had 0.382 lbs for the discharge. When I confirmed this, she stated that th e discharge should be 0.382 grams. She asked me to look into the data and call her back if they are still one of the top facilities after changing the units.

On June 27, 2011 at 9am, I called Stephanie King and le ft her a message. At 10:05am, Ms. King returned my

call and stated that she should have 2009 and 2010 non-detect data to me sometime today (the 27 th ). I confirmed that we changed the lbs discharge to gram and that we would call back with any further questions.