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 Kathleen 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. Cameron also stated that she had given 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 back and stated that the University of Houston did a 

study in 2009 at their facility. The facility accepted the results from the study 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 when 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 facility 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 Chlorophenol and a byproduct is PCBs. These are usually found in the sludge at the 

facility and disposed of offsite. The facility has a long history of non-detect 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 report 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 that they had at least pulled a sample within the same 

quarter of the study. Ms. King also stated that she believes the University of Houston had used a different 
Need to return call by / at/between and . Signature: 

sampling protocol than the facility uses and that she will check the methodology when she receives the report. 

The facility uses EPA protocols which 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 location and if there had been any change in operation over 

the last few years. She confirmed that the samples had been taken at the same location and that the operation 

had stayed the same. She mentioned that the facility was shut down in 2010 for 6 months due to low 

international demand but they are now back to their regular 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 for the outfall for 2009. They found that all 11 of their samples were non-detect 

and the sampling methods were based on EPA methodology. 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 explained to her that she can revise TRI data through 

the EPA TRI office and to search on the EPA website for more information. She stated that she has not received 

the University of Houston report yet but that she will email 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 2nd and 3rd 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 will ask the lab to send it. She also 

confirmed that outfall 001 is the main plant outfall; outfall 101 is an internal outfall located right before outfall 

001, and outfall 002 is a storm water outfall (which discharges to Harris County Ditch). Ms. King believed that 

the University of Houston study sampled outfall 001, which is the same outfall that the facility measures for 

PCBs. She stated that she will email me more information about the University of Houston contacts and the lab 

results shortly. 

On June 23, 2011 at 1:06pm, I called Stephanie King and left her a message. At 1:45pm she returned my call. 

She stated that she was still trying to get the 2009 data from 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 touch with the University of 

Houston to obtain a copy of the study. 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 the 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 left 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 27th). I confirmed 

that we changed the lbs discharge to gram and that we would call back with any further questions.