Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
13 - Site-Specific Human Health & Ecological Risk Assessment of Sediment at Port Burwell
Site -Specific Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment of Sediment at Port Burwell Project No. 122511075 5 Stantec Prepared for: Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 400-1331 Clyde Avenue Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 FINAL September 11, 2015 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................... ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1.1 1.1 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK .................... 1.1 2.0 SITE CHARACTERIZATION............................................................................................2.2 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................2.2 2.1.1 Subject Property and Surrounding Land Use ........................................... 2.2 2.1.2 Site Services.................................................................................................. 2.3 2.1.3 Topography and Drainage........................................................................ 2.3 2.1.4 Regional Stratigraphy................................................................................. 2.3 2.1.5 Biological Setting......................................................................................... 2.4 2.2 PREVIOUS REPORTS........................................................................................................ 2.5 2.3 ANALYTICAL SAMPLING SUMMARY............................................................................. 2.6 2.3.1 Selection of Reference Locations.............................................................2.7 3.0 HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT.............................................................................3.1 3.1 PROBLEM FORMULATION.............................................................................................. 3.1 3.1.1 Identification of Human Health COPCs................................................... 3.2 3.1.2 Identification of Human Receptors........................................................... 3.9 3.1.3 Identification of Human Health Exposure Pathways ............................ 3.11 3.1.4 Human Health Conceptual Site Model..................................................3.13 3.1.5 Problem Formulation Uncertainty Evaluation........................................3.13 3.2 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT...............................................................................................3.15 3.2.1 Bioavailability............................................................................................. 3.15 3.2.2 Exposure Equations...................................................................................3.16 3.2.3 Exposure Point Concentrations and Skin Permeability Coefficient (kp)............................................................................................................... 3.16 3.2.4 Exposure Dose Results............................................................................... 3.17 3.2.5 Exposure Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation ........................................ 3.19 3.3 HAZARD ASSESSMENT.................................................................................................. 3.20 3.3.1 Toxicological Reference Values..............................................................3.20 3.3.2 Toxicity Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation ........................................... 3.21 3.4 HUMAN HEALTH RISK CHARACTERIZATION............................................................... 3.22 3.4.1 Non -Carcinogenic Health Effects...........................................................3.22 3.4.2 Carcinogenic Health Effects....................................................................3.22 3.4.3 Non -Carcinogenic Risk Characterization.............................................. 3.23 3.4.4 Carcinogenic Risk Characterization....................................................... 3.25 3.4.5 Overall Results of Risk Characterization.................................................. 3.26 3.4.6 Risk Characterization Uncertainty Evaluation ....................................... 3.26 3.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................3.27 ® Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL 4.0 ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT................................................................................4.1 4.1 PROBLEM FORMULATION.............................................................................................. 4.1 3.7 4.1.1 Identification of Ecological COPCs.......................................................... 4.2 3.8 4.1.2 Identification of Ecological Receptors.....................................................4.7 Table 3-6 Human Receptor Characteristics......................................................................... 3.10 4.1.3 Identification of Ecological Exposure Pathways ..................................... 4.9 3.12 4.1.4 Identification of Assessment Endpoints .................................................. 4.10 3.15 4.1.5 Ecological Conceptual Site Model......................................................... 4.10 3.17 4.1.6 Problem Formulation Uncertainty Evaluation........................................4.12 4.2 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT...............................................................................................4.13 4.2.1 Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian Populations .............................. 4.13 4.2.2 Aquatic Community..................................................................................4.16 4.2.3 Exposure Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation........................................4.17 4.3 HAZARD ASSESSMENT.................................................................................................. 4.17 4.3.1 Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian Populations .............................. 4.17 4.3.2 Aquatic Community..................................................................................4.19 4.3.3 Toxicity Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation ........................................... 4.20 4.4 RISK CHARACTERIZATION............................................................................................ 4.21 4.4.1 Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian Populations .............................. 4.21 4.4.2 Aquatic Community..................................................................................4.23 4.4.3 Risk Characterization Summary...............................................................4.33 4.4.4 Risk Characterization Uncertainty Evaluation ....................................... 4.37 4.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..............................................................4.38 5.0 SUMMARY....................................................................................................................5.1 6.0 CLOSURE......................................................................................................................6.1 7.0 STANTEC QUALITY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM...........................................................7.2 8.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................8.1 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1 Summary of Species of Conservation Concern Potentially at the Site ............. 2.4 Table 2-2 Summary of Sediment Station IDs and Corresponding Sampling Locations ... 2.7 Table 3-1 Summary of the Human Health Screening of COPCs in Sediment ................... 3.5 Table 3-2 Summary of the Human Health Screening of COPCs in Surface Water........... 3.7 Table 3-3 Summary of Large Body Fish................................................................................... 3.7 Table 3-4 Summary of the Human Health Screening of COPCs in Fish Tissue ................... 3.8 Table 3-5 Summary of Human Health COPCs....................................................................... 3.9 Table 3-6 Human Receptor Characteristics......................................................................... 3.10 Table 3-7 Potential Exposure Pathways for Site Toddler Visitor .......................................... 3.12 Table 3-8 Potential Exposure Pathways for Site Adult Visitor ............................................. 3.12 Table 3-9 Summary of Exposure Frequency and Duration for Human Health Receptors .................................................................................................................................................... 3.15 Table 3-10 Exposure Point Concentrations and Dermal Permeability Coefficients for HumanHealth COPCs............................................................................................................ 3.17 Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Table 3-11 Toddler Site Visitor COPC Doses from Surface Water and Fish Consumption .................................................................................................................................................... 3.18 Table 3-12 Adult Site Visitor COPC Doses from Surface Water and Fish Consumption. 3.18 Table 3-13 Adult Site Visitor Carcinogenic COPC Doses from Surface Water and Fish Consumption............................................................................................................................ 3.19 Table 3-14 Toxicological Reference Values Used in Human Health Risk Assessment .... 3.20 Table 3-15 Non -Carcinogenic Risk (as Hazard Quotients) to Toddler Site Visitor from Surface Water and Fish Consumption..................................................................................3.23 Table 3-16 Non -Carcinogenic Risk (as Hazard Quotients) to Adult Site Visitor from Surface Water and Fish Consumption..................................................................................3.24 Table 3-17 Cancer Risk to Adult Site Visitor from Surface Water Contact and Fish Consumption............................................................................................................................ 3.25 Table 4-1 Ecological COPCs in Sediment.............................................................................. 4.3 Table 4-2 Ecological COPCs in Surface Water...................................................................... 4.5 Table 4-3 Summary of Ecological COPCs..............................................................................4.6 Table 4-4 MOECC Ecological COPCs in Sediment............................................................... 4.7 Table 4-5 Summary of Valued Ecological Components...................................................... 4.8 Table 4-6 Exposure Pathways for Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian VECs ................ 4.9 Table 4-7 VEC Home Ranges and Fraction of Time at the Site ......................................... 4.15 Table 4-8 Semi -Aquatic Mammalian Toxicity Reference Values ...................................... 4.18 Table 4-9 Semi -Aquatic Avian Toxicity Reference Values ................................................. 4.18 Table 4-10 CCME ISQGs and the PELs for Assessment of the Aquatic Life Community 4.19 Table 4-11 Hazard Quotients for Semi -Aquatic VECs......................................................... 4.22 Table 4-12 Hazard Quotients for Semi -Aquatic VECs - Potential Future Dredging ........ 4.22 Table 4-13 Comparison of Surface Water Maximum and 95% UCLM Concentrations against Ecological Guidelines............................................................................................... 4.23 Table 4-14 Toxic Units by Sediment Sample for Big Otter Creek, ranked by DDT (as a sum) .................................................................................................................................................... 4.24 Table 4-15 Toxic Units by Sediment Sample for Lake Erie, ranked by DDT (as a sum) ... 4.25 Table 4-16 Physical Characteristics of Samples within the Reference Locations and Exposure Locations in Big Otter Creek.................................................................................. 4.27 Table 4-17 Physical Characteristics of Samples within the Reference Locations and Exposure Locations in Lake Erie............................................................................................. 4.27 Table 4-18 Benthic Community Analysis Index Values for Sediment Sampling Stations 4.28 Table 4-19 Benthic Community Analysis Index Values for Sediment Sampling Stations 4.29 Table 4-20 Compiled Data Summary Table for Big Otter Creek Sediment Sampling Locations................................................................................................................................... 4.32 Table 4-21 Compiled Data Summary Table for Lake Erie Sediment Sampling Locations .................................................................................................................................................... 4.33 ® Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3-1 Human Health Conceptual Site Model..............................................................3.14 Figure 4-1 Ecological Conceptual Site Model.....................................................................4.1 1 Figure 4-2 Density of Benthic Organisms (Abundance) as a Function of Manganese HazardQuotients.....................................................................................................................4.34 Figure 4-3 Manganese Hazard Quotients (based on Severe Effect Levels) as a Result of % Clay....................................................................................................................................... 4.35 Figure 4-4 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Clay .........................4.36 Figure 4-5 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt ............................. 4.36 Figure 4-6 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and Total Organic Carbon .................................................................................................................................................... 4.37 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A FIGURES.....................................................................................................A.1 APPENDIX B DATA TABLES............................................................................................. B.1 APPENDIX C HUMAN HEALTH SCREENING....................................................................C.1 APPENDIX D HUMAN HEALTH TOXICITY PROFILES........................................................ D.1 APPENDIX E HHRA INPUTS AND CALCULATIONS..........................................................E.1 APPENDIX F ECOLOGICAL HEALTH SCREENING...........................................................F.1 APPENDIX G VEC PROFILES............................................................................................G.1 APPENDIX H ERA INPUTS AND CALCULATIONS............................................................ H.1 APPENDIX I LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ESA ........................................................ 1.1 APPENDIX J BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT ............................J.1 APPENDIX K BENTHIC COMMUNITY STRUCTURE ANALYSIS FIGURES ........................... K.1 APPENDIX L PROUCL 5.0 OUTPUTS.................................................................................L.1 ® Stantec iv SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Executive Summary Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to conduct a site-specific human health and ecological risk assessment (SSRA) of contaminated sediment, with remedial and/or risk management option analysis and development of a remedial action plan, at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario. The SSRA was completed using sediment data collected by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. (Terrapex) in 2012, and sediment, surface water, benthic invertebrate and fish tissue data collected by Stantec in 2015. The purpose of the SSRA was to identify the presence or absence of impacts to sediment and surface water for the aquatic portion of the Site, to determine whether or not concentrations of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) pose unacceptable risk to human or ecological receptors. Note that the terrestrial environment (i.e., soil and groundwater) have been assessed by Stantec under separate cover. For the human health risk assessment (HHRA), thallium, zirconium, and benzo(a)pyrene exceeded the guidelines for inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with surface water, and cobalt, iron, and uranium exceeded selected guidelines in fish tissue. In addition, acenaphthylene, and pyrene in sediment exceeded the selected sediment guideline for potential bioaccumulation in fish tissue. These COPCs were carried forward into the HHRA. The results of the HHRA suggest that there are no risks to the selected human receptors (Toddler Site Visitor, and Adult Site Visitor) due to inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site; exposure to all identified non -carcinogenic COPCs from sediment resulted in HQs less than the target benchmark of 0.2. For the Adult Site Visitor, chronic inadvertent ingestion of surface water, chronic dermal contact with water, and ingestion of fish from the Site resulted in an estimated cancer risk greater than 1 -in -100,000, the risk level considered to be "essentially negligible" by Health Canada. The fish consumption pathway was the primary exposure pathway for this estimated cancer risk. However, given the numerous conservative assumptions necessary in the exposure and risk estimation process, Stantec anticipates that actual on -Site risks posed by benzo(a)pyrene are negligible. Overall, the results suggest that there are likely no risks to human receptors due to exposure to sediment, surface water, or consumption of fish at the Site. For the ecological risk assessment (ERA), manganese, select PAHs and DDT (and metabolites) in sediment, and zinc in surface water, were carried through for risk assessment. The results of the ERA indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. This includes the potential for DDT and its metabolites to biomagnify in the food chain, thus resulting in a higher level of exposure for the top predators. Concentrations measured in fish tissue did not represent a concern to piscivorous birds and mammals. The results of the ERA are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL through the ingestion of surface water. Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. The viability of the aquatic health community was assessed using a weight -of -evidence approach. Taking into consideration the results of the surface water chemistry, sediment chemistry and benthic community analysis, two of the three lines of evidence indicate that there are no significant effects on the aquatic life community. The bioaccumulative potential of the COPCs was also assessed within fish but the results were more relevant to the assessment of birds and mammals than to the fish themselves as tissue -based toxicity limits were not available. Based on a comparison of the sediment physical characteristics with the COPC toxic potential and benthic community indices, the strongest influence on potential adverse effects appears to be substrate composition, mainly the proportion of clay and silt, and the concentration of TOC. Consequently, the COPCs identified at the Site are not expected to pose unacceptable adverse effects to the viability of the aquatic community within Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie within the study area. The results of the Preliminary Quantitative Human Health Risk Assessment and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (PARA/SLERA) of the terrestrial environment (Stantec, 2015) determined that there were no human health risks to the selected human receptors due to direct exposure pathways (i.e., soil ingestion, soil dermal contact, inhalation of suspended soil particulate) for all non -carcinogenic and carcinogenic COPCs. Similarly, the results of the SLERA suggested that there are no significant risks to aquatic or terrestrial receptors at the Site, including species of conservation concern, from soil or groundwater at the Site. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. Based on the results of the SSRA and the current land use, no further work and no remedial actions are currently being proposed for the Site. However, should the land use of the Site change, further environmental assessment may be required to confirm the absence of risks (i.e., to confirm acceptable sediment and/or surface water quality). ® Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Abbreviations ADD Average Daily Dose AF Absorption Factor AO Aesthetic Objective APEC Area of Potential Environmental Concern Atlantic PIRI Atlantic Partnership in RBCA Implementation ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry BTEX Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylenes BW Body Weight CCME Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment CCME CEQG CCME Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines CCME ISQG CCME Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guidelines CCME SQG CCME Soil Quality Guideline COPC Contaminant of Potential Concern CPR Canadian Pacific Railway CR Cancer Risk CSM Conceptual Site Model DFO Department of Fisheries and Oceans DL Detection Limit DLRA Detailed Level Risk Assessment DQRA Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment EPC Exposure Point Concentration EPT Richness Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera Richness ERA Ecological Risk Assessment ESA Environmental Site Assessment FCSAP Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan FCSI Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory ha Hectares HBI Hilsenhoff Biotic Index HQ Hazard Quotient HHRA Human Health Risk Assessment HMW High Molecular Weight IF Intake Factor IR Ingestion Rate kp Dermal Permeability Coefficient LEL Lowest Effect Levels LMW Low Molecular Weight Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL LOAEL Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level LOE Lines of Evidence MOECC Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change MOECC PSQG MOECC Guidelines for the Protection and Management of Aquatic Sediment Quality in Ontario NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association NOAEL No Observed Adverse Effect Level OCP Organochlorine Pesticides OG Operation Guidance Values PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyls PEL Probable Effect Level PHC Petroleum Hydrocarbon PQRA Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment PWGSC Public Works and Government Services Canada RAIS The Risk Assessment Information System RBCA Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action RIVM Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment RfC Reference Concentration RfD Reference Dose SARA Species At Risk Act SCH Small Craft Harbour SLERA Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment SQuiRTS Screening Quick Reference Tables SSRA Site -Specific Risk Assessment TCEQ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality TCEQ PCL TCEQ Protective Concentration Level TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen TOC Total Organic Carbon TR Target Risk, for carcinogenicity; usually 1 in 100,000 or 1 x 10-5 TRV Toxicity Reference Value UCLM Upper Confidence Limit of the Mean OF Uptake Factor USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA EcoSSL USEPA Ecological Soil Screening Level USEPA IRIS USEPA Integrated Risk Information System USEPA RSL USEPA Regional Screening Levels VEC Valued Ecological Component WHO World Health Organization Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL 1.0 Introduction Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to conduct a site-specific human health and ecological risk assessment (SSRA) of contaminated sediment, with remedial and/or risk management option analysis and development of a remedial action plan, at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario. The SSRA was completed using sediment data collected by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. (Terrapex) in 2012, and sediment, surface water, benthic invertebrate, and fish tissue data collected by Stantec in 2015. The purpose of the SSRA was to identify the presence or absence of impacts to sediment and surface water for the aquatic portion of the Site, and to determine whether or not concentrations of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) pose unacceptable risk to human or ecological receptors. Note that the terrestrial environment (i.e., soil and groundwater) has been assessed by Stantec under separate cover. This work is being completed for due diligence purposes, as well as for the possible divestiture of the Site to the Municipality of Bayham. 1.1 HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK All chemicals (from anthropogenic and natural sources) have the potential to cause toxicological effects. However, the level of the potential effect (i.e., risk) depends on the level (quantity) of dose or exposure, the receptor (e.g., person or wildlife) being exposed, the route and duration of exposure (e.g., oral exposure for chronic durations), and the hazard (e.g., cancer, reproductive impairment) caused by the chemical. If all components are present (exposure, receptor, hazard), and exposure is sufficiently high to surpass any threshold for effects, the possibility of a toxicological risk exists. If one or more of these components are missing, then there is unlikely to be potential risk. The SSRA was conducted according to widely accepted risk assessment methodologies and follows guidance published and endorsed by regulatory agencies, including the Canadian Council of the Ministers of the Environment (CCME), Health Canada, Environment Canada, and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Generally, the following framework is used in a risk assessment: • Site Characterization • Problem Formulation • Exposure Assessment • Toxicity Assessment • Risk Characterization • Uncertainty Evaluation These are defined in terms of human health risk assessment (HHRA) in Section 3.0 and in terms of ecological risk assessment (ERA) in Section 4.0. These steps are followed by a discussion of the results and recommendations. Stantec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL 2.0 Site Characterization The following documents (summarized in Section 2.2) were reviewed in order to gain a better understanding of the Site: • Enhanced Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Site No. 4766, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated March 2001, completed by MacViro Consultants Inc • Assessment of Environmental Risks for Municipality of Bayham at Port Burwell, report dated March 2012, completed by Stantec Consulting Ltd. • Phase 1/11 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated July 10, 2013, completed by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. In addition to these documents, desktop research as well as information obtained by Stantec during supplemental field investigations conducted in March and May 2015, were used to obtain Site characterization information as described in the following sections. Note that although the site characterization section describes both the terrestrial and aquatic environments at the Site, the SSRA relates only to the aquatic component (i.e., sediment and surface water impacts). 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1.1 Subject Property and Surrounding Land Use The Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (SCH) is located at the confluence of Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie in Port Burwell, Ontario (see Figure 1, Appendix A). The Site encompasses an area of approximately 78 hectares (ha) and includes land and water lots in Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie. Owing to the absence of residential structures, the fact that the area is open to unrestricted public access, and historical uses, the land use for the Site is commercial. The Site is currently used as a recreational and commercial fishing access point, community wharf and harbour of refuge. From the early 1900s to the mid 1970s, the Site was used as a small fishing wharf. In the 1970s, it was expanded to accommodate shipment of commodities including coal, potash, fuel oil and fertilizer. Bulk materials were stored on both sides of the harbour. Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) tracks served the dock for the rail car ferry/bulk carrier Ashtabula on the east side of the harbour, and a 2.7 million litre capacity bulk fuel tank that received product by boat was located on the west side of the harbour. By 1973, commercial harbour traffic had ceased with transfer of bulk goods service to nearby Port Stanley, leaving just the west side bulk fuel oil tank. Since then, it has operated as a recreational and commercial vessel harbour. There is currently one vacant Canadian Coast Guard building on the Site (see Figure 2, Appendix A), located southwest of the harbour, which has been classified as a Contaminated Site. An assessment conducted by SNC-Lavalin Inc. (SNC) in 2015 concluded that the Site can be considered for closure following demolition of the building, and no further action was required (SNC, 2015). Stantec 2.2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) identifies the Port Burwell property as Directory of Federal Real Property (DFRP) Property Number 54022. The TBS notes that there are 10 Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory (FCSI) identifiers for the property. The current Site is identified as FCSI 00024432. Lands to the east and west include private and publically-owned properties, including Port Burwell Provincial Park to the west, which includes a campground and sandy beach for recreation and swimming. Big Otter Creek extends to the north and Lake Erie to the south. 2.1.2 Site Services The Site is serviced with drinking water by the Municipality of Bayham (Terrapex, 2013), therefore, Site groundwater was categorized as being non -potable. According to the 2012 Assessment of Environmental Risks Report prepared by Stantec, the harbour provides privately operated dockage and marina services to recreational and commercial fishing vessels, and is also a possible harbour of refuge for vessels in danger on Lake Erie. The turning basin has filled in along the west pier wall since the routine or scheduled dredging of the accumulating sediment load from Big Otter Creek has ceased. Dredging of sediment from the harbour was last completed in 2012 as part of Project Ojibwa. The CPR locomotive turn table at the foot of Wellington Street in the east harbour, and the bulk fuel tank site near the end of Chatham Street in the west harbour, remain visible today. Although these features are not on the Subject Lands, they are in close proximity. 2.1.3 Topography and Drainage As described in the Enhanced Phase I ESA conducted by MacViro (2001), the topography of the land portion of the Site is as follows: • Relatively flat with a slight slope towards Lake Erie. The Site is predominantly a water lot. • General direction of groundwater flow is assumed to be towards Big Otter Creek, while groundwater flow at the southern portion of the Site is expected to be to the south, toward Lake Erie. The watershed for Big Otter Creek is dominated by an agricultural land -use that is expected to present organic pollution to the aquatic environment via surface run-off and drainage. A waste water treatment plant, located at the mouth of the creek, will also contribute organic loading to the area. 2.1.4 Regional Stratigraphy Surficial soils in the general area are till and glaciolacustrine deposits consisting predominantly of silt and clay and minor sand, which include basin and quiet water deposits (MacViro, 2001). Bedrock in the vicinity of the Site is described as being of the Middle Devonian Era, specifically the Dundee Formation which consists of limestone, dolostone, and shale. ® Stantec 2.3 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Substrate within Big Otter Creek was comprised primarily of fine sand, silt and detritus. Upstream stations within the creek were dominated by fine sand. Farther downstream, closer to the lake, substrates were finer and dominated by silt. Lake Erie Stations were dominated by hard -packed fine sand. 2.1.5 Biological Setting The Site is located within the Lake Erie Lowland ecoregion, which is classified as having one of the most temperate climates in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2010). This climate in conjunction with fertile soils makes it an important agricultural area. The dominant land cover in this ecoregion is cropland with limited areas of mixed and deciduous forests on the Niagara Escarpment. Snow cover present during supplemental sampling activities in February 2015 prevented characterization of the biological environment. However, based on 1995 aerial photographs assessed during the Enhanced Phase I ESA conducted by MacViro (2001), the shoreline is covered with grass and/or gravel and rocks where not comprised of structures associated with the SCH, and the terrestrial environment consists of grasses and weeds. MacViro (2001) determined that there were no significant wetlands on or adjacent to the Site as well as no protected or significant wildlife habitat associated with the Site. According to the Phase 1/11 ESA conducted by Terrapex (2013) and additional desktop research, multiple species of conservation concern have the potential to be present at the Site (see Table 2-1). A Site visit conducted in November 2012 determined that suitable habitat was present at the Site for each of these species (Terrapex, 2013). Table 2-1 Summary of Species of Conservation Concern Potentially at the Site Species Category �e6mmort It —serdwillnumim SARA Status Ontario Status Acadian Flycatcher Empidonax virescens Endangered Endangered Birds Cerulean Warbler Setophaga cerulea Special Concern Threatened Louisiana Waterthrush Parkesia motacilla Special Concern Special Concern Yellow -breasted Chat Icteria virens virens Special Concern Endangered American Badger Taxidea taxus Endangered Endangered Mammals Woodland Vole Microtus pinetorum Special Concern Special Concern Jefferson Salamander Ambystoma jeffersonianum Threatened Endangered Fowler's Toad Anaxyrus fowleri Endangered Endangered Blanding's Turtle Emydoidea blandingii Threatened Threatened Reptiles and Amphibians Milksnake Lampropeltis triangulum Special Concern Special Concern Gray Ratsnake Pantherophis spiloides Threatened Endangered Eastern Ribbonsnake Thamnophis sauritus sauritus Special Concern Special Concern Massassauga Sistrurus catenatus Threatened Endangered Fish Eastern Sand Darter Ammocrypta pellucida Threatened Endangered Notes: SARA = Species at Risk Act Stantec 2.4 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL 2.2 PREVIOUS REPORTS Previous reports conducted at the Site (listed above) are summarized below. Enhanced Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Site No. 4766, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated March 2001, completed by MacViro Consultants Inc. MacViro Consultants Inc. (MacViro) was retained by the Ontario Region of Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), on behalf of DFO to carry out an Enhanced Phase I ESA of the Port Burwell SCH in the Village of Port Burwell, Ontario. The Enhanced Phase I ESA consisted of a site reconnaissance visit, historical records review and analytical testing of sediment and soil samples. Observations made during the Enhanced Phase I ESA revealed minor concerns. One soil sample taken from the beach property revealed concentrations of metals that were below guidelines published by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) and the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). However, four of six sediment samples revealed concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), metals, and OCPs that exceeded the CCME Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guidelines (ISQGs) and/or the MOECC Guidelines for the Protection and Management of Aquatic Sediment Quality in Ontario (PSQGs; August 1993) Lowest Effect Level (LEL). The Enhanced Phase I ESA indicated areas on the property where concentrations of metals, nutrients, pesticides, and PAHs in sediment exceeded the LELs in the PSQGs and/or the ISQGs in the CCME Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines (CEQGs). Such contamination could pose potential problems for future activities on the property, such as dredging. It was recommended that concentrations of contaminants in the sediment be compared to background sediment concentrations on the SCH property and that the extent of the sediment concentration exceedances be delineated. Assessment of Environmental Risks for Municipality of Bayham at Port Burwell, report dated March 2012, completed by Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec Consulting Ltd. was retained by the Municipality of Bayham (that includes Port Burwell) to assess environmental risks associated with the potential property transfer of federal lands at the harbour. Tasks included a review of background information and reports readily available from the Municipality and other sources. This study was not intended to meet the requirements of a Phase I ESA under CAN/CSAZ768-01 or Ontario Regulation 153/04, and was intended to be an historical review. Gaps in critical information within the available information were identified, leading Stantec to recommend a Phase I and a Phase II ESA to assess soil, groundwater and sediment quality to close the information gaps. It was determined that an assessment of environmental risks must consider the potential environmental liability risks to the Municipality in assuming the federal lands based on known environmental impacts from currently available documents, and from unknown environmental impacts that might be identified during a Phase I and Phase II ESA. However, a full risk assessment could not be completed until the gaps in critical information were closed. Stantec 2.5 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Phase 1/11 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated July 10, 2013, completed by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. Terrapex Environmental Ltd. (Terrapex) was retained by PWGSC on behalf of DFO to conduct a Phase 1/11 ESA at the DFO Port Burwell SCH located in Port Burwell, Ontario. The Phase I ESA identified three Areas of Potential Environmental Concern (APECs) and COPCs at each APEC including petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs), metals/inorganics, nutrients, PAHs, OCPs, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and soil pH issues. As part of the Phase II ESA, three borehole sampling locations were drilled at APEC 1 and monitoring wells were installed to assess near -surface and subsurface conditions in APEC 1 (terrestrial and aquatic lot). Potential impacts associated with sources of potential contamination identified in APEC 2 and APEC 3 (terrestrial lots) were also investigated. Additionally, three surficial sediment cores were advanced in Big Otter Creek to collect surficial and subsurface sediment samples. Three additional surficial sediment cores were collected from APEC 1, as well as from outside the study area to determine background sediment conditions at the site. COPCs in APEC 1 included PHC F2 to F4, select PAHs, metals/inorganics and OCPs. Terrapex recommended that a Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PARA) and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA) be conducted to further assess the COPCs in contaminated soil and groundwater on the land. They also recommended that a Detailed Level Risk Assessment (DLRA), benthic invertebrate survey and toxicological assessment of the impacted sediment be conducted in the inner harbour of the Port Burwell SCH. 2.3 ANALYTICAL SAMPLING SUMMARY The sediment data relied upon for the development of the Problem Formulation were collected by Terrapex in November 2012 (see Terrapex, 2013). Stantec collected additional data in March 2015 (i.e., sediment, surface water, and benthic invertebrates). Additional samples were collected in May 2015 (i.e., surface water and fish). The sediment, surface water, and fish tissue data have been included in the screening of COPCs. The full data set used for this Problem Formulation is presented in Appendix B. The screening of those data with respect to the identification of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) is discussed separately below for human health (Section 3) and ecological receptors (Section 4). It should be noted that the detection limits (DLs) for certain COPCs where greater than selected human health -based and/or ecological health -based guidelines. Based on historical activities, potential contaminants at the Site included: benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes (BTEX), PHCs F1 to F4, metals, PAHs, PCBs and OCPs. A quantitative screening of all analytical data was conducted within each of the human health and ecological sections of the SSRA. ® Stantec 2.6 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL 2.3.1 Selection of Reference Locations Reference sites were chosen to be representative of conditions in the environment potentially reflecting regional anthropogenic (not site -related) sources of contaminants (modified from CCME 2012). For Big Otter Creek and Port Burwell, where contaminants are contributed by agricultural and urban run-off, and boat traffic, the term reference is used in the context of an altered local background condition (i.e., where the local conditions surrounding a site are not pristine due to non -point sources of contaminants). Within Big Otter Creek, reference samples were located upstream of the Site where the creek characteristics were closely matched to the sampling locations within the Site. Similarly, reference locations within Lake Erie, were chosen to be at a distance sufficient to be uninfluenced by the on-site sources of contamination but at locations with similar water depth and substrate characteristics to those samples collected on-site. Table 2-2 Summary of Sediment Station IDs and Corresponding Sampling Locations Sediment Sampling Station ID Sediment Sample Name M06;dl —A 1 S D 15-01 2 S D 15-02 4 S D 15-04 5 S D 15-05 6 S D 15-06 7 S D 15-07 8 S D 15-08 9 S D 15-09 10 SDI 5-10 11* SDI 5-11 Lake Erie Stations 3 S D 15-03 12* SD 15-12 13* SD 15-13 14* SD 15-14 15* SD 15-15 Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station Samples were not collected for benthic community analysis from the locations corresponding to where sediment samples were collected by Terrapex. Since only co -located sample data can be used for the sediment weight -of -evidence approach, these sediment data were not considered in the decision matrix for risk assessment. 4 Stantec 2.7 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.0 Human Health Risk Assessment The purpose of the human health risk assessment (HHRA) is to evaluate the potential that human receptors may experience exposures to COPCs found at the Site in excess of what may be considered to be acceptable, tolerable or of negligible risk. The potential for adverse human effects is quantified by comparing the amount of a COPC to which a receptor is expected to be exposed, or come in contact with, on a daily basis (daily dose), to the amount of that substance that can be tolerated (i.e., below which adverse human health effects are not expected), referred to as the toxicity reference value (TRV) or toxicity benchmark. The quotient of the two and the magnitude by which these values differ from parity (e.g. daily dose = TRV) is used to make inferences about the possibility of risks to human receptors. The HHRA process followed a widely recognized framework that progresses from a qualitative initial Problem Formulation step, through Exposure and Toxicity Assessments, and culminates in a quantitative Risk Characterization. Following the Risk Characterization, the Conclusions and Recommendations stemming from the assessment were discussed. An Uncertainty Evaluation followed each step to discuss the uncertainties inherent in the HHRA process. The primary guidance for conducting the HHRA was that of Health Canada, including: • Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part I: Guidance on Human Health Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PARA), Version 2.0 (Health Canada, 2010a). Revised 2012. • Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors, Version 2.0 (Health Canada, 2010b). • Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part V: Guidance on Human Health Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment for Chemicals (DQRAChem; Health Canada, 2010c). 3.1 PROBLEM FORMULATION The objective of the Problem Formulation stage of the HHRA was the development of a focused understanding of which substances constitute COPCs, what human receptors are likely to be present at the Site for exposure, and how COPCs migrate from the source(s) and ultimately reach, and are taken up by, the human receptors at the Site. The main points addressed in the Problem Formulation were: • Identification of human health COPCs • Identification of human receptors • Identification of human exposure pathways Results of these activities were then summarized in a human health conceptual site model. Stantec 3.1 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.1.1 Identification of Human Health COPCs COPCs for human health at the Site were identified by screening the maximum reported chemical concentrations in sediment, in surface water and in fish tissue against measured background levels and against applicable human health -based guidelines. The data used for the HHRA was collected by Terrapex in November 2012 (Terrapex, 2013), and by Stantec in March and May 2015. Given that the Site is a federal property, preference was given to those human health -based guidelines provided by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). In cases where no federal guidelines were available, guidelines or standards from other jurisdictions were identified. A detailed description of the screening process is provided in Section 3.1.1.1 for sediment, in Section 3.1.1.2 for surface water, and in Section 3.1.1.3 for fish tissue. Since the Site is being assessed for possible divestiture to the Municipality of Bayham (in addition to due diligence), maximum chemical concentrations were also screened against human health -based guidelines provided by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). Exceedances of the MOECC standards were noted in Appendix C, however these compounds were not carried through for further assessment if the federal guidelines were not exceeded. Given current land use as described in Section 2.0, commercial guidelines were applied to the Site. For all substrates, where ten or more samples were collected, a contaminant did not have a health -based guideline, and all samples analyzed were below the limits of detection, the contaminant was reasonably assumed to not be present at the Site at concentrations that would result in unacceptable risks and the contaminant was not carried forward for further assessment. However, if less than ten samples were collected, and chemicals were analyzed with a method detection limit greater than the available risk-based guideline, those chemicals were identified as COPCs and were carried through the screening for further assessment. Calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, silicon, and sulfur were quantified in the laboratory analysis of sediment and surface water samples but were not carried forward for risk assessment. They are considered to be inherently non-toxic and are not generally considered to be of concern from a human health standpoint (TCEQ, 2007). These parameters were therefore not carried forward for further assessment. Representative background concentrations of COPCs in sediment, surface water, and in fish tissue, were defined as the maximum measured concentration of each COPC in all background/reference samples, where all samples were normally distributed. Using the maximum concentration as a background value was considered appropriate if the value was within two standard deviations of the calculated mean for all samples (non -detect samples were assigned a concentration of one half of the detection limit, and were included in the calculation of the mean), and if there was an even distribution of the data. If the maximum concentration was determined to be an outlier, this value was disregarded, and the second highest concentration was selected to represent background. This was done for TKN, chromium, uranium and zinc in order to prevent the bias, introduced by a non -representative value, from influencing the inherent conservatism in the COPC selection approach. Stantec 3.2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.1.1.1 COPCs in Sediment All sediment sampling locations for data employed in this report are depicted in Figure 3, Appendix A. As part of sediment sampling in 2012, Terrapex collected nine (plus one duplicate) sediment samples, which included six (plus one duplicate) surface sediment samples, and three deep sediment samples. In 2015, Stantec collected 21 (plus two duplicate) sediment samples, which included 15 (plus one duplicate) surface sediment samples, and nine (plus one duplicate) deep sediment samples, which had a maximum depth of 4.5 meters below top of sediment. Three of the nine surface sediment samples collected by Terrapex in 2012 were collected from background locations, and five of the fifteen surface sediment samples collected by Stantec in 2015 were collected from background locations. All background surface sediment samples were collected in close proximity to the Site (see Figure 3, Appendix A). Health Canada and CCME currently do not provide health -based guidelines for human exposure to sediment, and no other suitable human health risk-based guidelines for sediment were identified. In order to be conservative for screening of COPCs, as individuals have been reported fishing in the creek and access to the beach located immediately to the east of the Site is unrestricted, maximum sediment contaminant concentrations from the currently available sediment samples were screened against direct contact guidelines for soil (the lesser of ingestion, dermal contact, particulate inhalation, and protection of potable water, if available) to identify sediment COPCs requiring further risk assessment for human receptors. Although soil and sediment are different, it is anticipated that ingestion of, and dermal contact with, sediment will not exceed that for soil. Human contact with sediment at the Site is likely to be infrequent, as sediment at the Site is found at depths of approximately 3 m below the surface of the water. Dermal contact with sediment is likely to be less than that for soil owing to the wash -off effect by surface water. It would be necessary for persons contacting sediment dermally, such as during swimming or wading, to pass through surface water which would wash off much of the dermally - adhering sediment. As a result, risk-based soil quality guidelines provide a reasonable yet conservative basis for screening of sediment -borne COPCs. All parameters were screened against the lowest of applicable human health -based soil quality guidelines for coarse soil with commercial land use. Preference was given to CCME human health -based soil quality guidelines (CCME, 2015a) for screening and identification of COPCs. For petroleum hydrocarbons, the pathway -specific values from the CCME Canada -Wide Standards for petroleum hydrocarbons in soil were used (CCME, 2008a). In the absence of CCME pathway -specific guidelines, guidelines from the following alternate sources were employed, in order of preference: 1. MOECC human soil component standards from Table 8: Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Potable Ground Water Condition (OMOE, 2011). ® Stantec 3.3 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 2. USEPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) for industrial land use (USEPA, 2015a); RSL values were adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR (target risk (for carcinogenicity)) =1 E-05 to reflect differences between the USEPA and Health Canada/CCME approach to guideline derivation. 3. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Protective Concentration Levels (TCEQ PCLs) for commercial scenario (TCEQ, 2014); PCL values were adjusted to HQ=0.2 to reflect differences between the TCEQ and Health Canada/CCME approach to guideline derivation. All chemicals in sediment at the Site were either below screening human health soil guidelines or were not detected. However, the accumulation of sediment -borne contaminants in fish, with subsequent consumption of those fish, is another potential pathway of exposure not considered within the screening guidelines employed. Therefore, in order to be conservative for the fish consumption exposure pathway, the maximum chemical concentrations from all available sediment samples from the Site were compared to local background in addition to ecological health -based quality guidelines for protection of aquatic life (discussed in detail within the Ecological Risk Assessment, in Section 4.1.1). Where a chemical was not directly analyzed in fish tissue, did not have an ecologically -based sediment guideline, but is known to have a high potential for bioaccumulation in fish tissue, the chemical was carried forward for risk assessment of the fish consumption pathway. Sediment parameters that were carried forward as human health COPCs are presented in Table 3-1. To identify COPCs that may be associated with the fish consumption pathway, the following guidelines were employed for screening. • CCME Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (freshwater interim sediment quality guideline (ISQG) (CCME, 2015b) • MOECC Sediment Standards from Table 9: Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Non -Potable Ground Water Condition (OMOE, 201 1) • MOECC Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach; lowest effect level (LEL) (OMOE, 2008) • Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Version 3.0, Ecological Screening Protocol for Petroleum Impacted Sites in Atlantic Canada; chronic narcosis -based sediment toxicity benchmarks (Atlantic PIRI, 2012). • National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Screening Quick Reference Table (SQuiRTS), most conservative value (Buchman, 2008) In all cases, if only provisional or interim guidelines were available, preference was given to more recent guidelines based on newer science. The complete compilation of data is presented in Appendix B and the pathway -specific human health screening of maximum chemical concentrations is presented in Appendix C. Sediment parameters that were carried forward as human health COPCs for both direct contact and the fish consumption pathway are presented in Table 3-1. Stantec 3.4 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Although the maximum concentration for PHC F3 exceeded the ecological sediment guideline, exceedances were limited to the samples collected by Terrapex in 2012. Based on the most recent sediment characterization program conducted by Stantec in 2015, concentrations of PHC F3 were below the laboratory detection limit for the majority of sediment samples, with the exception of three samples where PHC F3 was reported at concentrations below the sediment quality guideline. Based on the most recent sediment sampling data, PHC F3 was not carried forward as an ecological COPC in sediment. Table 3-1 Summary of the Human Health Screening of COPCs in Sediment 4& Petroleum Hydrocarbons PHC F3 (>C16 C34) ConcentrationSite Maximum ckground Federal MOECC Uncentr. (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) .- and BTEX 180 12 3,500°1 5,800 NA 43.3- No Metals Manganese 590 190 NG NG 5,200 ° 460' No3 Thallium 0.072 <0.050 1 1 NA NG NO3 Non -Carcinogenic PAHs Acenaphthylene 0.008 (<0.01) <0.0050 NG 2.3 NA 0.00587 Yes2 Pyrene 0.086 0.0044 NG 78 NA 0.053 Yes2 Organochlorine Pesticides p,p' DDD 0.022 <0.002 NG 1, NG 0.008 f No3 DDD, o,p'- 0.008 <0.002 NG NG NG NG NO3 o,p'DDD+ p,p'DDD 0.03 <0.002 NG 3.3 NA 0.00354 NO3 p,p'-DDE 0.035 <0.002 NG NG 68 c 0.0051 No3 o,p'DDE + p,p' DDE 0.035 <0.002 NG 2.3 NA 0.00142 No3 p,p'-DDT 0.006 <0.002 NG NG NG NG NO3 DDT + Metabolites 0.07 <0.003 NG NG NG NG NO3 DDT Total 0.07 <0.002 NG 2.3 86 c 0.00119 NO3 Notes: < = reported detection limit NG = no guideline available 1 Background calculated as the maximum of background samples collected by Terrapex in 2012 and Stantec in 2015. 2 COPC retained for fish consumption pathway, owing to maximum concentration being greater than the sediment ecological guideline, and parameter not analyzed for in fish tissue. 3 COPC is not retained for the fish consumption pathway, as measured concentrations in fish tissue were found to be less than the selected fish tissue criteria (see Appendix C for details of screening). CCME Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines (SQG) for the Protection of Environmental and Human Health; lowest of applicable human health guidelines, commercial land -use; coarse textured soil. Q' CCME CWS for PHCs in Soil; lowest human health guideline, commercial land use for coarse-grained surface soils b OMOE (201 1) Site Condition Standards. Table 9 - Soil Components for Within 30m of a Water Body. USEPA RBC Regional Screening Levels; industrial soil (USEPA, 2015a). Hazard quotient adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR=1 E-05. d CCME Canadian SQG for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater interim sediment quality guidelines (ISQG). e Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Version 3.0; chronic narcosis -based sediment toxicity benchmarks. f OMOE Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach, May 2008; lowest effect level (LEL). ® Stantec 3.5 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.1.1.2 COPCs in Surface Water A total of 15 (plus one duplicate) surface water samples were collected by Stantec in 2015. Five of the 15 surface water samples were collected from background locations. Health Canada and CCME provide limited general requirements for recreational water quality guidelines and aesthetics; however currently they do not provide health -based guidelines for human exposure to surface water, other than if it is used as a source of drinking water. Although the Site is non -potable, access to the beach located immediately to the east of the Site is unrestricted and swimming at the beach may lead to inadvertent ingestion of surface water. Therefore, in order to be conservative for screening of COPCs, maximum surface water contaminant concentrations were screened against drinking water guidelines to identify COPCs requiring further risk assessment for human receptors. Preference was given to Health Canada Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (GCDWQ) (2014) for screening and identification of COPCs. In the absence of Health Canada GCDWQ values, guidelines from the following alternate sources were employed, in order of preference: 1. MOECC Technical Support Document for Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines (OMOE, 2006). 2. USEPA Regional Screening Level (RSL) for residential tapwater (USEPA, 2015a); RSL values were adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR=1 E-05 to reflect differences between the USEPA and Health Canada/CCME approach to guideline derivation. 3. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Protective Concentration Levels (TCEQ PCLs) for commercial scenario (TCEQ, 2014); PCL values were adjusted to HQ=0.2 to reflect differences between the TCEQ and Health Canada/CCME approach to guideline derivation. 4. MOECC Site Condition Standards for Groundwater Components in a Potable Ground Water Scenario (OMOE, 2011). In all cases, if only aesthetic objectives (AO), operation guidance values (OG), or interim guidelines were available, preference was given to more recent guidelines based on newer science and/or health -based guidelines. All chemicals in surface water at the Site were either below screening guidelines or were not detected, with the exception of benzo(a)pyrene, thallium and zirconium. Benzo(a)pyrene was measured at a maximum concentration greater than the applicable screening guideline. For thallium and zirconium, the detection limits for surface water analysis were greater than the selected screening guidelines. Therefore, benzo(a)pyrene, thallium, and zirconium were identified as COPCs in surface water, and were carried forward for further assessment. ® Stantec 3.6 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 The complete compilation of data is presented in Appendix B and the pathway -specific human health screening of maximum chemical concentrations is presented in Appendix C. Surface Water COPCs are summarized in Table 3-2. Table 3-2 Summary of the Human Health Screening of COPCs in Surface Water Parameter Concentration -- ..-._. ...........y ........ ....7 .... _... _..._. (Ng/L) Concentrations Guideline a Guideline b Jurisdictions (ug/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) (Ng/L) Fish Genus and Species __...-- Forward • 11 I 11 1 EXP -WS -01 White sucker (Catostomus commersonii) 11 72.07 50.0 53.8 EXP -WS -02 White sucker (Catostomus commersonii) 570 62.38 38.1 40.8 Benzo(a)pyrene Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) 4,500 52.96 63.5 69.4 EXP -CC -02 Notes: < = reported detection limit NG = no guideline available - = value not required Background calculated as the maximum of background samples collected by Terrapex in 2012 and Stantec in 2015. 2 COPC retained as all detection limits for parameter were greater than the selected guideline value. a Health Canada Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (2014). b MOECC Technical Support Document for Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines (OMOE, 2006). USEPA RBC Regional Screening Levels; residential tapwater (USEPA, 2015a). Values adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR=1 E-05. 3.1.1.3 COPCs in Fish Tissue A total of 20 (plus one duplicate) fish tissue samples (boneless, skinless fillets) were collected by Stantec in 2015. Ten of the fish samples were collected from the Site, and ten (plus one duplicate) of the fish samples were collected from two reference locations. Five of the fish samples were from large body fish (two white sucker (Catostomus commersonii); three common carp (Cyprinus carpio)), while the other five were composite samples of small body fish (emerald shiner (Notropis atherinoides)). For the reference locations, two (plus one duplicate) fish samples comprised large body fish (yellow perch (Perca flavescens); white bass (Morone chrysops)), and the other eight were composite samples of small body fish (four rainbow smelt (Osmerus mordax); four spottail shiner (Notropis hudsonius)). Data for large body fish weight and size are included in Table 3-3. Table 3-3 Summary of Large Body Fish ID On -Site Fish Genus and Species TotalSample EXP -WS -01 White sucker (Catostomus commersonii) 1,500 72.07 50.0 53.8 EXP -WS -02 White sucker (Catostomus commersonii) 570 62.38 38.1 40.8 EXP -CC -01 Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) 4,500 52.96 63.5 69.4 EXP -CC -02 Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) 5,100 55.20 61.0 66.5 EXP -CC -03 Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) 3,750 80.84 57.0 62.4 4 Stantec 3.7 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Total Sample ID Fish Genus and Species (g) (g) (cm) (cm) ja Reference Locations REF -I -WB -01 White bass (Morone chrysops) 268.16 47.50 24.6 25.9 REF2-YP-01 (+duplicate Yellow perch (Perca flavescens) 132.68 33.02 22.9 23.9 37.76 REFIYP-01 Health Canada and CCME do not currently provide health -based guidelines for human consumption of aquatic biota (e.g., fish). However, on behalf of Environment Canada, MacDonald et al. (2000) prepared a Compendium of Environmental Quality Benchmarks, which included an appendix titled "A Summary of the Available Tissue Residue Quality Criteria and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Health". In order to be conservative for screening of COPCs, maximum fish tissue concentrations from the large body fish were screened against these guidelines to identify COPCs requiring further risk assessment for human receptors. COPC concentrations were also screened against background fish tissue sample concentrations. If no guideline was available, and COPC concentrations were greater than background values, these parameters were carried forward for further assessment. The complete compilation of data is presented in Appendix B and the pathway -specific human health screening of maximum chemical concentrations is presented in Appendix C. Fish tissue COPCs are summarized in Table 3-4. Table 3-4 Summary of the Human Health Screening of COPCs in Fish Tissue Notes: < = reported detection limit NG = no guideline available I Background calculated as the maximum of background samples collected by Terrapex in 2012 and Stantec in 2015 2 COPC retained owing to absence of published screening guideline for this COPC. 3 A Compendium of Environmental Quality Benchmarks (MacDonald, et. al, 2000). 3.1.1.4 Summary of Human Health COPCs Based on the screening of maximum sediment, surface water and fish tissue concentrations against applicable human health guidelines, Table 3-5 provides a summary of the human health COPCs carried forward into the HHRA. 4 Stantec M SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 3-5 Summary of Human Health COPCs Carried Forward for Evaluation COPC Sediment - Water Metals Cobalt No No Fish Tissue Yes Iron No No Yes Thallium No Yes No Uranium No No Yes Zirconium No Yes No lw Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene Yes No No Benzo(a)pyrene No Yes No Pyrene Yes No No Notes: I COPC is retained for fish consumption pathway. 3.1.2 Identification of Human Receptors The current use of the Site is as a SCH for recreational and commercial fishing boats and as a possible harbour of refuge. The Site is anticipated to be maintained for these uses in the future, even if divested to the Municipality of Bayham. Therefore, the potential human receptors expected at the Site are as follows: • Site Visitor (all ages) As noted in Sections 2.1.1, the most appropriate land use classification for the Site is commercial. The Site is used as a recreational and commercial fishing access point, community wharf and harbour of refuge. Lands to the east and west of the Site include private and publically-owned properties, including Port Burwell Provincial Park to the west, which includes a campground and sandy beach for swimming. The Site property boundaries are not fenced off, allowing unrestricted access to the Site, therefore, Site Visitors are anticipated to be occasionally present at the Site for recreational purposes. Site Visitors are expected to be of all age groups, and are conservatively assumed to be present on -Site for 1.5 hours/day, 7 days/week, for 39 weeks/year, the latter being the snow -free period for this part of Ontario (OMOE, 2011). It is assumed that a Site Visitor is a nearby resident that visits the Site on a regular basis. As previously noted, individuals have been reported fishing in the Site creek, and there is unrestricted access to the beach located to the east of the Site. For consumption of fish, it is assumed that consumption could occur throughout the entire year, owing to the possible preservation of fish for future consumption. 4 Stantec 3.9 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 The Site Visitor receptor is considered to be protective of any campers that may be present at the Site during their visit to the Provincial Park, owing to the short duration of camping activities relative to community residents. It is anticipated that a camper of any age group will visit the Site for up to 1.5 hours/day, 7 days/week, for up to 2 weeks/year while they are camping, therefore, the Site Visitor is considered protective of any campers that may be using the Site for recreational purposes. The Remediation Worker is not included as a receptor for the water lot portions of this Site. All sediment and most surface water concentrations were less than available human health -based quality guidelines for commercial land use. Remediation workers are not expected to consume surface water as drinking water or to catch fish at the Site for later consumption. Therefore, infrequent contact with sediments and surface water at the Site should pose no risk to a Remediation Worker receptor. Contact with sediment and surface water during any dredging activities will also be minimal, as past dredging operations have disposed of dredgate to deeper portions of Lake Erie, not removed and disposed of on land. Toddlers are generally the most sensitive receptor for exposure to threshold (non -carcinogens) contaminants due to their greater intake per unit of body weight via ingestion, inhalation and dermal contact. Adults are the most sensitive to non -threshold substances (carcinogens) due to the long duration of this life stage. All receptors are included for non -carcinogenic substances. For exposure to carcinogens, the Adult Site Visitor will be considered. The physical characteristics (required for exposure calculations) and specific values employed for each receptor were obtained from Health Canada (2010a) and are shown in Table 3-6. Table 3-6 Human Receptor Characteristics Stantec 3.10 years Toddler 7 mo. - 4 yr. - Visitor >_ 20 yr. Age Age Group Duration years 4.5 60 Body Weight kg 16.5 70.7 Inadvertent Water Ingestion b L/hour 0.049 0.021 Skin Surface Area Hands Arms (upper and lower) Legs (upper and lower) Body (arms+legs) Total Body cm2 430 890 1,690 2,580 6,130 890 2,500 5,720 8,220 17,640 Hours per event hours/ event 1.5 1,5 Hours per day on Site hours/ day 1.5 1.5 Days per week on Site days/ week 7 7 Stantec 3.10 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Characteristic... y Weeks per year on Site weeks/ year 39 39 Total Years Exposed years 4.5 60 Life Expectancy years - 80 Food Ingestion Rate Fish c kg/day 0.056 0.1 1 1 Days per year fish consumed d days 21 21 Notes: Human receptor characteristics obtained from Health Canada (2010a). b Values from USEPA "Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition", based on Dufour et at., (2006). Values from Richardson (1997). d Values from Statistics Canada (2008) "Fish caught and kept by resident anglers, 2005". Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/1 6-002-x/2008002/t/5212690-eng.htm 3.1.3 Identification of Human Health Exposure Pathways Exposure pathways are used to describe how a substance can move from impacted media (e.g., sediment) to a point where it can enter the body. Only those pathways for which there is a reasonable potential for exposure were considered quantitatively in the HHRH. For the identified COPCs at the Port Burwell SCH, the operable exposure pathways are inadvertent surface water ingestion and dermal exposure to surface water while swimming, and accumulation of COPCs in fish and subsequent consumption of those fish. For consumption of fish, it was assumed that consumption could occur throughout the entire year, owing to the possible preservation of fish for future consumption. In a survey of the Canadian population, Statistics Canada (2008) determined that in Ontario the average angler caught 85 fish per year; however, on average they kept and consumed only 25% of their catch (i.e., 21 fish) per year. Assuming one fish is consumed per fish meal, this would amount to 21 days consuming Site fish throughout the year. Site Visitors could inadvertently ingest surface water and would have dermal contact with surface water during swimming and wading activities at the beach east of the Site. As surface water samples were not filtered prior to analysis, the measured concentrations in surface water include the COPCs contained in the suspended sediment within the water sample, so inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact of sediment is also, indirectly, included with ingestion and dermal contact of surface water. A summary of the exposure pathways relevant for a Toddler Site Visitor and Adult Site Visitor are presented in Table 3-7 and Table 3-8, respectively. ® Stantec 3.11 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 3-7 Potential Exposure Pathways for Site Toddler Visitor Mo ential Exposure Route Complete Exposure Carried Forward for Further - Assessment? Justification Dermal contact with sediment Der All sediment concentrations were Ingestion of sediment No No lower than available soil quality guidelines. Therefore, this is not a Inhalation of sediment completed pathway for the HHRA. particulate It is conservatively assumed that surface water can be inadvertently Ingestion of surface water Yes Yes consumed during activities at the Site. Therefore, this pathway is carried Yes forward for further assessment. Dermal exposure to surface water is Dermal exposure to surface water is conservatively included as Toddler Dermal contact with surface Yes Yes Site Visitors may come in contact with water Yes Visitors may come in contact with surface water during swimming and surface water during swimming wading activities in close proximity to activities in close proximity to the Site. the Site. It is possible that Adult Site Visitor It is possible that Toddler Site Visitor Fish Consumption Yes Yes receptors would consume fish harvested from the Site. harvested from the Site. Table 3-8 Potential Exposure Pathways for Site Adult Visitor PPotential Exposure Route Complete Exposure Pathway? Carried Forward for Further Assessment? Justification Dermal contact with sediment All sediment concentrations were Ingestion of sediment No No lower than available soil quality guidelines. Therefore, this is not a Inhalation of sediment completed pathway for the HHRA. particulate It is conservatively assumed that surface water can be inadvertently Ingestion of surface water Yes consumed during activities at the Site. Therefore, this pathway is carried Yes forward for further assessment. Dermal exposure to surface water is Dermal contact with surface conservatively included as Adult Site water Yes Visitors may come in contact with surface water during swimming activities in close proximity to the Site. It is possible that Adult Site Visitor Fish Consumption Yes Yes receptors would consume fish harvested from the Site. Stantec 3.12 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.1.4 Human Health Conceptual Site Model The human health conceptual site model is presented graphically in Figure 3-1, below. It provides a simplified representation of potential exposure pathways, linking sources and COPCs to each human receptor identified in Section 3.2. A rationale for the inclusion/exclusion of exposure pathways is provided above in Section 3.3. 3.1.5 Problem Formulation Uncertainty Evaluation Potential sources or deposits of contaminants were identified at the beginning of the project and sampling locations were selected to focus on areas of concern. Consequently, the human health screening is based on a relatively limited number of samples. However, given the available information it was assumed that the targeted sampling locations encompassed the areas with maximum or near maximum concentrations of chemicals tested. Overall, the selection of COPCs, receptors and exposure scenarios chosen for this risk assessment should ensure that a reasonably conservative assessment is conducted. ® Stantec 3.13 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Source Media Transport Mechanisms Exposure Pathways Receptors on-site Dermal Contact with Sediment Site Visitors Site Visitors Site Visitors RCE I R LEGEND: = • = Complete E)posure Pathway For a complete discussion of human receptors and a)posure pathways see Section 3.1.2 and 3.1.3. TeM = Incomplete E)posure Pathway NA = Not Applicable Figure 3-1 Human Health Conceptual Site Model 3.14 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.2 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT The Exposure Assessment estimates the interaction between receptors and the COPCs at the Site. The main objective of the Exposure Assessment is to develop a quantitative estimate of exposure to each COPC for each receptor, based on available data. The human receptor characteristics summarized in Table 3-6 were incorporated into the Exposure Assessment. Daily intakes from all relevant sources and pathways, as calculated using Health Canada (2010a) exposure equations, are discussed in the following sections and are presented for each COPC. Ingestion rates and receptor characteristics (e.g. body mass) were obtained from Health Canada (2010a), unless otherwise noted in Table 3-6. In order to determine total Site exposure, combined intakes from both surface water (ingestion, dermal) and fish consumption were determined, even if the chemical was a COPC in only one of those environmental media. A summary of the exposure frequency and durations for each human health receptor is presented in Table 3-9. As indicated in Section 3.1.2, all receptors are included for exposure to non -carcinogenic substances. For exposure to carcinogens, the Adult Site Visitor will be considered. Table 3-9 Summary of Exposure Frequency and Duration for Human Health Receptors A Toddler Site Visitor is assumed to inadvertently ingest and come into dermal contact with surface water at the Site, for a period of 1.5 hours/ day, 7 days/week, for up to 39 weeks/year over 4.5 years as a toddler. A Toddler Site Visitor is also assumed to ingest fish for 1 day/week for 21 weeks/year, which is the average frequency of consumption of angler - caught fish (Statistics Canada 2008). 3.2.1 Bioavailability An Adult Site Visitor is assumed to inadvertently ingest and come into dermal contact with surface water at the Site, for a period of 1.5 hours/ day, 7 days/week, for up to 39 weeks/year over a span of 60 years in adulthood. They are also assumed to ingest fish for 1 day/week for 21 weeks/year, which is the average frequency of consumption of angler - caught fish (Statistics Canada 2008). For all exposure calculations involving oral ingestion, the absorption factors were set to a default of 100% or 1.0, as outlined in Health Canada guidance (2010a). In the case of dermal absorption of contaminants from surface water across the skin, the dermal permeability coefficients, (kp values; units of cm/hour), published by the USEPA or other available sources were selected. (3 Stantec 3.15 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.2.2 Exposure Equations Health Canada's exposure equations were used to determine non -carcinogenic hazard quotients (HQs) and cancer risk (CR) for the HHRA, with the exception of dermal exposure during swimming for which the equation was drawn from the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2004). Example calculations are provided in Appendix E. Inherent in the calculation of exposure doses is the issue of exposure amortization. Health Canada (2010c) defines exposure amortization as "the process used to derive the average dose (typically per day) of a chemical over a given exposure period (i.e., average dose rate, often expressed as mg/kg body weight - day) by taking into account the overall duration of exposure and the pattern(s) of exposure in the scenarios selected for the site." Exposure durations can be continuous, intermittent, or can last only for a short period. All of these exposure patterns require an examination of the suitability of amortization of the exposure dose over the entire exposure duration and a critical assessment of the effects of amortization on the resulting exposure dose. Health Canada (2010c) classifies exposure durations as chronic (greater than 90 days), sub- chronic (between 14 and 90 days), and acute (less than 14, but often involving a single high intensity exposure). By amortizing an acute or sub -chronic exposure over a longer (chronic) period of time, the resulting dose may be artificially minimized and potential risks underestimated For the Port Burwell SCH, all exposure durations were considered to be chronic (greater than 90 days), given the assumed 39 weeks per year of exposure. 3.2.3 Exposure Point Concentrations and Skin Permeability Coefficient (kp) Exposure point concentrations (EPCs) represent the exposure of a receptor over an exposure area during a period of time and are used in the quantitative assessment of risks. For the purposes of this HHRA, where sufficient sample size permitted (i.e., n >_ 10), the 95% upper confidence limit of the mean (UCLM) was calculated and used as the EPCs. All UCLMs were calculated with the USEPA's ProUCL Version 5.0 statistical software using the recommended method. If more than one 95% UCLM value was recommended by the ProUCL software, the highest value was selected in order to be conservative. When sample sizes were less than 10, maximum measured COPC concentrations in surface water, and fish tissue were used as EPCs for risk estimates, as per Health Canada PQRA guidance (Health Canada, 2010a). If all samples for a parameter were not detected, half the value of the highest detection limit was used as the EPC. COPC concentrations in surface water at the beach area east of the Site were conservatively assumed to be equal to those measured on Site. ® Stantec 3.16 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Dermal permeability coefficients (kp values; units of cm/hour) define the rate of COPC dermal absorption while immersed in water (i.e., while swimming), and are published by the US Environmental Protection Agency amongst other authoritative sources. This variable is an essential component for the calculation of COPC exposures from contaminated surface water while swimming. All exposure point concentrations and dermal permeability coefficients are listed below in Table 3-10. Table 3-10 Exposure Point Concentrations and Dermal Permeability Coefficients for Human Health COPCs Surface Water Exposure COPC Point Concentrations Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene 0.0051 Fish Tissue Exposure -Coefficient 0.000252 Dermal Permeability 0.0911 4 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.015 0.0752 0.7134 Pyrene 0.013 0.00522 0.201 5 Metals Cobalt 0.251 0.012 0.00045 Iron 542.8 29 0.001 5 Thallium 0.0251 0.005 0.001 5 Uranium 0.796 1 0.007 0.001 5 Zirconium 0.251 NV 3 0.001 5 Notes: I Surface water samples for this COPC were less than the detection limit; EPC in surface water was set to half the detection limit. 2 Fish tissue was not collected and analyzed for this COPC. Fish tissue EPC was modelled from sediment concentrations. Further information regarding the calculation of such EPCs is presented in Section 4.2. 3 Zirconium does not bioaccumulate in the aquatic food chain (see http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi- bin/sis/search/a?dbs+hsdb:@term+@DOCNO+7347). Therefore, an EPC for zirconium in fish was not derived and no estimate of exposure due to fish consumption was determined. 4 kp value selected from The Risk Assessment Information System (RATS), 2013. Available from: hftp://rais.ornl.gov/tools/profile.php. 5 kp value selected from USEPA, 2004. 3.2.4 Exposure Dose Results As was noted in Table 3-7 through Table 3-8, as well as Figure 3-1, exposure pathways for both receptors included inadvertent ingestion of surface water, dermal contact with surface water, and ingestion of fish. The doses resulting from these exposures to COPCs are presented below. The equations and inputs for the calculation of each dose are provided in Appendix E. Stantec 3.17 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.2.4.1 Non -Carcinogenic COPC Doses Table 3-11 Toddler Site Visitor COPC Doses from Surface Water and Fish Consumption Oral Ingestion Dose Dermal Dose Fish Consumption Dose 1LC0.PC.A .. .. .. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbo Acenaphthylene 1.67E-08 1.90E-07 4.88E-08 Pyrene 4.34E-08 1.09E-06 1.02E-06 Metals Cobalt 8.35E-07 4.18E-08 2.34E-06 Iron 1.81 E-03 2.27E-04 5.66E-03 Thallium 8.35E-08 1.04E-08 9.76E-07 Uranium 2.66E-06 3.33E-07 1.37E-06 Zirconium 8.35E-07 1.04E-07 NV Notes: NV = No value Table 3-12 Adult Site Visitor COPC Doses from Surface Water and Fish Consumption ••r�-al Ingestion Dose Dermal Dose Fish Consumption .. .. .. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene 1.67E-09 1.28E-07 2.26E-08 Pyrene 4.34E-09 7.33E-07 4.70E-07 Metals Cobalt 8.35E-08 2.81 E-08 1.08E-06 Metals Iron 1.81 E-04 1.52E-04 2.62E-03 Thallium 8.35E-09 7.02E-09 4.52E-07 Uranium 2.66E-07 2.23E-07 6.32E-07 Zirconium 8.35E-08 7.02E-08 NV Notes: NV = No value Stantec 3.18 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.2.4.2 Carcinogenic COPC Doses Table 3-13 Adult Site Visitor Carcinogenic COPC Doses from Surface Water and Fish Consumption 3.2.5 Exposure Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation The Exposure Assessment performed as part of the HHRA was based on: • Available data to describe COPC levels in surface water and in fish tissue Sound conservative assumptions for certain parameters, as required. Generally accepted methods for dose estimation that are designed to be conservative (to err on the side of over -predicting exposures and risks). Exposure times and durations were based on Health Canada guidance (2010a) or other sources as referenced, and represent a conservative (maximal) estimate of Site exposures and durations for the current land use. Although exposure was not continuous for 365 days per year, the employed assumptions when combined for total exposure from both surface water and fish consumption equated to 39 weeks (i.e., > 9 months) duration, therefore, exposure was considered best evaluated as chronic exposure, and exposures were amortized over a full year. Estimation of doses on the basis of maximum measured concentrations (e.g., EPC for benzo(a)pyrene in surface water) will over-estimate true exposure, which is a more accurate function of the average or typical concentration. Estimation of fish EPCs on the basis of modeling from measured sediment concentrations will over-estimate true exposure. The model assumes that fish are exposed continuously over their lifespan to the COPC concentration in Site sediment. Stantec 3.19 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.3 HAZARD ASSESSMENT Toxic effects from exposure to environmental contaminants vary depending on the form of the contaminant, the dosage, the route of exposure, the frequency and duration of exposure, and the physiological state, sex, and age of the exposed population. Toxicological effects may be brief or prolonged, reversible or irreversible, immediate or delayed. The purpose of the Toxicity Assessment is to weigh available evidence regarding the potential for the environmental contaminants to cause adverse effects in exposed populations and to provide an estimate of the relationship between the extent of exposure and the increased likelihood and/or severity of those adverse effects. An essential part of the risk assessment process is the identification of toxicity reference values (TRVs) against which exposures can be compared. These values are based on scientifically reviewed, published toxicological assessments from Canadian, American or other authoritative sources. TRVs have been established by several regulatory agencies including Health Canada, the USEPA, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and the World Health Organization (WHO). In the selection of TRVs, preference has been given to values published by Health Canada, as directed in the Health Canada Guidance document (2010a). 3.3.1 Toxicological Reference Values Details regarding the toxicity of COPCs and the TRVs selected for use in this HHRA can be found in the toxicological profiles in Appendix D. The TRVs used are shown in Table 3-14. Table 3-14 Toxicological Reference Values Used in Human Health Risk Assessment COPC Exposure I Chronic TRV Critical Health Effect(s) T Wr Reference; i Non -Carcinogenic Cobalt Ingestion 0.0014 mg/kg -d Cardiomyopathy RIVM, 2001 Iron Ingestion 0.7 mg/kg -d PPRTV, 2015 Thallium Ingestion 0.00001 mg/kg -d No observed Effects USEPA, 2009 Uranium Ingestion 0.0006 mg/kg -d Nephrotoxic, hepatotoxic effects Health Canada, 2010b Zirconium Ingestion 0.00008 mg/kg -d PPRTV, 2015 Acenaphthylene Ingestion 0.05 mg/kg -d RIVM, 2001 Nephrotoxic: renal tubular Health Canada, Pyrene Ingestion 0.03 mg/kg -d pathology, decreased kidney 2010b weights Carcinogenic gastric tumours (mostly squamous Health Canada, Benzo(a)pyrene Ingestion 2.3 (mg/kg -d)-1 cell papillomas, with a few 20101b carcinomas) Stantec 3.20 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.3.2 Toxicity Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation There is a very limited amount of toxicological information on the effects associated with human exposures to low levels of chemicals in the environment. What human information is available is generally based on epidemiological studies of occupationally -exposed workers. These studies are generally limited in scope and provide results that may not be applicable to chronic or continuous exposures to low levels of chemicals. Because human toxicological information is limited, TRVs for many contaminants are based on the results of dose -response assessment studies using animals. The use of experimental animal data to estimate potential biological effects in humans introduces uncertainties into the evaluation of potential human health effects. These estimations require that a number of assumptions be made, including the following: • The toxicological effect reported in animals is relevant and could occur in humans, • The assumption that extrapolation from high -dose studies to low-dose environmental exposures adequately represents the shape of the dose -response curve in the low-dose exposure range; • Short-term exposures used in animal studies can be extrapolated to chronic or long-term exposures in humans; and • The uptake of a compound from a test vehicle (e.g., drinking water, food) in animals will be the same as the uptake of the chemical from environmental media (soil, sediment, air -borne particulate matter) in humans. There are a number of uncertainties associated with extrapolating from experimental animal data to humans. To address these weaknesses, regulatory agencies such as Health Canada and the USEPA make conservative assumptions to try and account for the uncertainties associated with this process. The uncertainties are accounted for by the use of uncertainty factors (UFs) that are used to lower the TRV well below the level at which adverse health effects have been reported in the test species. Uncertainty factors are generally applied by factors of 10 and are used to account for the following types of uncertainties: • Variation within the population (protection of sensitive members of the population); • Differences between humans and the test species; • Differences in using short- or medium-term studies to estimate the health effects associated with long-term or chronic exposures; and • Limitations in the available toxicological information. The magnitude of the uncertainty factors applied by the various regulatory agencies provides an indication of the level of confidence that should be placed in the reference value. Uncertainty factors typically range between 100 and 10,000, although some can be lower than 10. The latter values are found for a few chemicals where sound and substantial human toxicological information is available to enable the setting of toxicological end-point solely on the basis of human epidemiological information. Stantec 3.21 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 The application of uncertainty factors is intended to introduce a high degree of conservatism into the risk assessment process and to ensure, as far as possible, that limited exposures which exceed the reference concentrations will not result in adverse human health effects. Because risk assessments that use these regulatory limits incorporate the conservatism used in the development of the toxicological information, the results can generally be viewed as being extremely conservative. 3.4 HUMAN HEALTH RISK CHARACTERIZATION The purpose of the Risk Characterization is to combine the results of the Exposure Assessment and the information from the Toxicity Assessment to estimate the potential risks to human health from the COPCs evaluated. 3.4.1 Non -Carcinogenic Health Effects For non -carcinogenic (threshold) health effects, the potential for risk is conservatively estimated by dividing the dose by the TRV (oral or inhalation, as applicable) for that COPC, as follows: HQ = Dose (mq/kg-d) TRV (mg/kg -d) The computed ratio is termed the Hazard Quotient (HQ). For all threshold effects chemicals, if the HQ is less than or equal to 0.2, Health Canada considers that the intake of the COPC does not exceed the tolerable intake, and negligible health risks are expected. Conversely, if the HQ exceeds 0.2, Health Canada considers that there may be a potential risk to human health, and a more detailed assessment should be undertaken. The HQ of 0.2 sets the upper limit of exposure from the Site to be equal to or less than 20% of the TRV (termed the tolerable daily intake for a chemical with threshold type effects), thus (protectively) allowing 80% of the exposure to be from additional unquantified sources. 3.4.2 Carcinogenic Health Effects Given that the Site is not residential, and exposure is not continuous (i.e., does not continue uninterrupted for 365 days per year), cancer risk was computed for adult exposure only. Adulthood is the single longest life stage (60 years of 80 year life expectancy). Also, to increase conservatism, average adult daily exposure over a typical year was not further adjusted (not amortized) for years exposed over lifetime. In general, the potential for carcinogenic health effects was conservatively estimated by multiplying the average adult daily dose for the carcinogenic COPCs by the appropriate slope factor or unit risk. Since slope factors and unit risks are pathway -specific, only the dose associated with the relevant exposure pathway was considered. In general: Cancer Risk (CR) = Average Adult Daily Dose (mg/kg -d) x Cancer Slope Factor (mg/kg -d)-1 Stantec 3.22 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Health Canada slope factors were obtained (where available) for the assessment of cancer risks posed by COPCs since Site is a federal property. With the exception of benzo(a)pyrene, Health Canada slope factors do not exist for dermal exposure routes; therefore, most cancer risks posed by simultaneous oral+dermal exposure were determined as recommended by Health Canada (Health Canada, 2010a). For the purposes of the HHRA, if the CR is less than or equal to 1 -in -100,000 (<_ 1E-05), Health Canada considers the cancer risks to be "essentially negligible". Conversely, if the CR exceeds 1 -in -100,000, Health Canada considers that there may be potential cancer risks to human health, and a more detailed assessment may be warranted. The 1 E-05 risk level has been widely accepted by federal agencies and is applicable to the Site. However, the determination of the negligible (tolerable, acceptable) cancer risk is a matter of program policy and not one of science, per se. Although the 1 E-05 cancer risk level has been widely adopted by provincial environmental agencies, Ontario has adopted an essentially negligible target cancer risk of 1 in 1 million (<_ 1 E-06) for purposes of contaminated site management in that province. 3.4.3 Non -Carcinogenic Risk Characterization The results of the Risk Characterization of the Site for inadvertent ingestion of surface water, dermal contact with surface water, and consumption of fish caught on -Site, are presented below. Calculations for HQs, showing exposure doses from each pathway for each receptor, are found in Appendix E. Table 3-15 Non -Carcinogenic Risk (as Hazard Quotients) to Toddler Site Visitor from Surface Water and Fish Consumption Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene 3.34E-07 3.81 E-06 9.76E-07 5.12E-06 Pyrene 1.45E-06 3.64E-05 3.38E-05 7.17E-05 Metals Cobalt 5.97E-04 2.99E-05 1.67E-03 0.0023 Iron 2.59E-03 3.24E-04 8.09E-03 0.011 Thallium 8.35E-03 1.04E-03 9.76E-02 0.11 Uranium 4.43E-03 5.54E-04 2.28E-03 0.0073 Zirconium 1.04E-02 1.31 E-03 NV 0.012 Notes: NV = No value 4 Stantec 3.23 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 3-16 Non -Carcinogenic Risk (as Hazard Quotients) to Adult Site Visitor from Surface Water and Fish Consumption Surfacelr Water ConsumptionFish .. • DermalPWI 't • e Dermal HQ Oral HQ Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene 3.34E-08 2.56E-06 4.52E-07 2.64E-05 Pyrene 1.45E-07 2.44E-05 1.57E-05 2.61 E-04 Metals Cobalt 5.97E-05 2.00E-05 7.74E-04 8.54E-04 Iron 2.59E-04 2.18E-04 3.74E-03 0.0042 Thallium 8.35E-04 7.02E-04 4.52E-02 0.047 Uranium 4.43E-04 3.72E-04 1.05E-03 0.0019 Zirconium 1.04E-03 8.77E-04 NV 0.0019 Notes: NV = No value 3.4.3.1 Inadvertent Ingestion of Surface Water No risk is evident at the Site from exposure to COPCs due to inadvertent ingestion of surface water while swimming, for any of the receptors. 3.4.3.2 Dermal Contact with Surface Water No risk is evident from exposure to COPCs due to dermal contact with surface water while swimming at the Site, for any of the receptors. 3.4.3.3 Consumption of Fish from Site No risk is evident from exposure to COPCs due to consumption of fish harvested at the Site, for any of the receptors. 3.4.3.4 Total Exposure due to Simultaneous Intake from All Sources No risk is evident due to the combined intake of COPCs via all identified exposure pathways (i.e., inadvertent surface water ingestion while swimming, dermal contact with surface water while swimming, fish ingestion) for any of the receptors. Stantec 3.24 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 3.4.4 Carcinogenic Risk Characterization Carcinogenic risks were characterized for the Adult Site Visitor for exposure to benzo(a)pyrene in surface water and due to fish tissue consumption. Cancer risk (CR) results are presented in Table 3-17. Sample calculations for cancer risk, showing average adult daily dose for the receptor, are found in Appendix E. Table 3-17 Cancer Risk to Adult Site Visitor from Surface Water Contact and Fish Consumption Notes: Highlighted values exceed applicable HQ benchmark For the Adult Site Visitor, chronic inadvertent ingestion of surface water while swimming, chronic dermal contact with water while swimming, and ingestion of fish harvested from the Site resulted in a cancer risk that was greater than 1 -in -100,000. As shown in Table 3-17, the sum of inadvertent ingestion of surface water and chronic dermal contact with water while swimming resulted in a cancer risk less than 1 -in -100,000; however, ingestion of fish harvested from the Site resulted in a risk that was approximately equal tol-in-100,000, when rounded to appropriate significant digits It should be noted that the EPC used to calculate the dose and cancer risk for benzo(a)pyrene due to fish consumption, was a conservative modelled concentration value predicted from benzo(a)pyrene concentrations in sediment. PAHs were not analysed for in fish tissue. Published fish bioaccumulation and bioconcentration factors for benzo(a)pyrene vary widely (Eisler 1987). Many animals, including fish, are able to metabolize and eliminate PAHs (ATSDR, 1995). PAHs show little tendency to biomagnify in food chains, especially in fish, despite their high lipid solubility, due to being rapidly metabolized (Eisler 1987). Therefore, the prediction of the fish tissue EPC for benzo(a)pyrene on the basis of sediment or water concentrations is highly uncertain and likely to be over-estimated. Also, although anglers annually consume an average of approximately 21 fish that they have caught over the course of a year (StatsCan, 2008), it is unlikely that an individual would consume fish caught exclusively from the Site. As a result of these considerations, the estimated cancer risk associated with the consumption of fish from the Site is anticipated to over -predict the actual cancer risk presented by benzo(a)pyrene contamination at this Site. Overall, with consideration of the conservative assumptions employed for exposure assessment (swimming every day throughout snow -free period; regular consumption of fish preserved and transported from Site to home), these results indicate that the cancer risk associated with 4 Stantec 3.25 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 chronic exposure to benzo(a)pyrene from the Site is likely to be negligible. However, confirmation of this (and how actual risk compares to the Ontario cancer risk target of 1 in a million) would require the direct analysis of fish tissue samples for carcinogenic PAHs. 3.4.5 Overall Results of Risk Characterization For both of the human receptors (Toddler Site Visitor and Adult Site Visitor), exposure to all identified COPCs in Site sediment, surface water, and fish tissue resulted in HQs less than 0.2. These results indicate that there are likely no risks to human receptors from exposure to COPCs via direct exposure pathways (i.e., surface water ingestion, dermal absorption from surface water) and consumption of fish from the Site. For the Adult Site Visitor, chronic inadvertent ingestion of surface water and chronic dermal contact with water resulted in a cancer risk less than 1 -in -100,000, whereas ingestion of fish from the Site was predicted to present a potential cancer risk for benzo(a)pyrene exposure greater than 1 -in -100,000. Despite the estimated cancer risk associated with benzo(a)pyrene, Stantec anticipates that actual Site risks are negligible (i.e., <_ 1 in 100,000), given the numerous conservative assumptions and methods necessary in the estimation of cancer risk. 3.4.6 Risk Characterization Uncertainty Evaluation For each human receptor, modeled exposure to COPCs was dependent on receptor characteristics such as body weight, and ingestion rates. These attributes were based on Health Canada (2010a) guidance, where available, or best professional judgement, and are believed to represent a realistic estimate of receptor characteristics. Toxicological reference values (TRVs) employed to characterize risks were published by regulatory agencies such as Health Canada. TRVs are considered to provide a conservative estimate of the dose or exposure level that will have negligible or no health consequences. Due to the methods of derivation, exceeding TRVs is not necessarily indicative of health risk. Instead, exceeding a TRV is only indicative of exceeding the level that is considered, for all intents and purposes, to be definitely safe for the vast majority of the population (within the limits of available science). Exposure was not continuous for 365 days per year. However, the employed exposure assumptions, particularly when combined for total exposure from both surface water and fish consumption, was 39 weeks (i.e., > 9 months) duration. Therefore, exposure was considered best evaluated as chronic exposure for comparison to chronic duration TRVs. The prediction of fish tissue EPCs on the basis of bioaccumulation or bioconcentration factors from concentrations in sediment or surface water are highly uncertain and likely over-estimate the actual Site -related concentration of benzo(a)pyrene in fish tissue. Reported bioconcentration and bioaccumulation factors for benzo(a)pyrene in fish span several orders of magnitude (summarized by Eisler 1987; see also USEPA 2014) and depend on fish species, the Stantec 3.26 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Human Health Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 specific fish tissue being analyzed, as well as the trophic position of the species (USEPA 2014). Accumulation into muscle is much lower than into internal organs such as the gall bladder (Eisler 1987). The organic carbon content of underlying sediments also influences the accumulation of benzo(a)pyrene in freshwater fish (McCarthy et al. 2003). As a result, the estimated doses and risks associated with the consumption of fish from the Site are also anticipated to be over- estimated. As a result of these considerations, the estimates of exposure and risk presented herein are considered to err on the side of caution; they likely over-estimate actual exposures and risks. 3.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Maximum concentrations of thallium, zirconium, and benzo(a)pyrene exceeded the guidelines for ingestion and dermal contact with surface water, and cobalt, iron, and uranium exceeded selected guidelines in fish tissue. In addition, acenaphthylene, and pyrene in sediment exceeded the selected sediment guideline for bioaccumulation in fish tissue. These COPCs were carried forward into the HHRA. A Toddler Site Visitor and Adult Site Visitor were considered to be the most sensitive receptors at the Site. The exposure pathways considered were inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site. Consequently, risks for the human receptors were assessed for COPCs identified in Site surface water and fish tissue. Benzo(a)pyrene is a known carcinogen; therefore, the Adult Site Visitor was also assessed for cancer risk associated with inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish from the Site. The potential for adverse non -carcinogenic health effects was estimated by calculating HQs. The potential for adverse carcinogenic health effects was estimated by calculating the cancer risk for benzo(a)pyrene. For the two human receptors (Toddler Site Visitor and Adult Site Visitor), combined exposure to all identified non -carcinogenic COPCs from surface water and fish consumption resulted in HQs less than 0.2. For the Adult Site Visitor, chronic inadvertent ingestion of surface water, chronic dermal contact with water, and ingestion of fish from the Site resulted in an estimated cancer risk greater than l - in -100,000, the risk level (which is considered to be "essentially negligible" by Health Canada). The fish consumption pathway was the primary exposure pathway for this estimated cancer risk. However, given the numerous conservative assumptions necessary in the exposure and risk estimation process, Stantec anticipates that actual on -Site risks posed by benzo(a)pyrene are negligible. However, should greater resolution be required of potential cancer risks associated with ingestion of benzo(a)pyrene in Site fish, the collection of additional fish samples, and analysis for carcinogenic PAHs, will be necessary. Overall, the results suggest that there are likely no risks to human receptors due to exposure to sediment, surface water, or consumption of fish at the Site. Stantec 3.27 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.0 Ecological Risk Assessment The purpose of the ecological risk assessment (ERA) is to evaluate the potential for ecological receptors to be experiencing negative health effects as a result of exposure to existing COPCs found in the aquatic environment at the Site. The ERA was conducted following a widely recognized framework that progresses from an initial Problem Formulation, through Exposure and Toxicity Assessments, and culminates in a quantitative Risk Characterization that integrates the information from the previous three elements. Following this, the Conclusions and Recommendations stemming from the assessment are discussed. Each step also includes a discussion of the uncertainties inherent to that section of the ERA. The risk assessment methodology for the ERA considered guidance from the following documents: • Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance (Environment Canada, 2012) • A Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment, General Guidance (CCME, 1996) • A Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment, Technical Appendices (CCME, 1997) • Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment (USEPA, 1998) The focus of an ERA is typically to quantify the potential risks to ecological receptors at the population level rather than at the individual level, with the notable exception being for species protected under the Species at Risk Act or other legislation protective of rare or endangered wildlife. Changes in individual health do not necessarily equate to eventual changes in population health over time. For the purposes of the ERA, the primary assessment endpoint is the protection of wildlife populations based on predicted effects on growth, reproduction, or survival (Suter, 2007). 4.1 PROBLEM FORMULATION The objective of the Problem Formulation is the development of a focused understanding of which chemicals assessed during the Site characterization are ecological COPCs and how ecological receptors living at, near, or frequenting the Site may be exposed to the COPCs. Relevant endpoints of the effects resulting from exposure to COPCs are also defined. The main tasks in the Problem Formulation are the following: • Screening of environmental data to identify ecological COPCs • Review of aquatic habitat to identify ecological receptors • Identification of exposure pathways • Identification of assessment endpoints ® Stantec 4.1 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 The results of these tasks are summarized in an ecological conceptual site model that provides a visual depiction of the relevant pathways linking the source(s) of COPCs in various environmental media and biota to the ecological receptors of interest. 4.1.1 Identification of Ecological COPCs Ecological COPCs at the Site were identified by screening the maximum reported chemical concentrations in Site sediment and surface water against local background and applicable ecological health -based guidelines. The Site characterization data used to identify Site and background concentrations for the Problem Formulation were collected by Terrapex in November 2012 and by Stantec in March and May 2015. The complete data set is provided in Appendix B and a detailed description of the screening process is provided in Section 4.1.1.1 for sediment and Section 4.1.1.2 for surface water. Given that the Site is a federal property, preference was given to those ecological health -based guidelines provided by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). However, where suitable values were not available, ecologically relevant standards or guidelines were obtained from alternate jurisdictions. Since the Site is being assessed for possible divestiture to the Municipality of Bayham (in addition to due diligence), chemical concentrations were also screened against ecological health - based guidelines provided by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC; formerly OMOE) (OMOE, 2011). The results of the MOECC screening are intended for information purposes only and any additional COPCs identified were not carried forward into the risk assessment. Calcium, lithium, magnesium, potassium, silicon, sulfur, titanium and zirconium were quantified in the laboratory analysis of sediment and/or surface water but not carried forward in the ERA for one or both of the following reasons: 1) these parameters are not known to be associated with any historical on-site activities or relevant off-site activities (i.e., there is no reason to believe that they would be COPCs); 2) these parameters do not have relevant screening guidelines or standards for surface water or sediment but are generally not regarded as being particularly toxic and in some cases play a role in the proper function of biological systems. As noted in Section 2.3, the detection limits for some parameters in sediment (i.e., select OCPs) and surface water (i.e., total PCBs and select OCPs) were greater than applicable guidelines. For those parameters that were all below detection limits but the detection limits were greater than the applicable guideline, Site concentrations were compared to concentrations representative of background conditions. If all samples (i.e., Site and background) were below detection limits, the chemical was assumed to be present at the Site at concentrations that would not result in unacceptable risks, and the chemical was not carried forward for further assessment. Stantec 4.2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.1.1.1 COPCs in Sediment The maximum chemical concentrations from all the available sediment samples (n=30; includes surface and samples at depth, as well as duplicates) collected from the exposure area at the Site were compared to ecological health -based quality guidelines based on the following order: • CCME Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (freshwater interim sediment quality guideline (ISQG) (CCME, 2015a) • MOECC Sediment Standards from Table 9: Generic Site Condition Standards for Use within 30 m of a Water Body in a Non -Potable Ground Water Condition (OMOE, 201 1) • MOECC Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach; lowest effect level (LEL) (OMOE, 2008) • Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Version 3.0, Ecological Screening Protocol for Petroleum Impacted Sites in Atlantic Canada; chronic narcosis -based sediment toxicity benchmarks (Atlantic PIRI, 2012). • National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Screening Quick Reference Table (SQuiRTS), most conservative value (Buchman, 2008) Chemical concentrations were also compared to concentrations representative of local background (n=8) based on samples collected by Terrapex in 2012 and by Stantec in 2015. If the maximum Site concentration was less than or equal to the maximum background concentration, the chemical was not carried forward as an ecological COPC. If the maximum concentration was determined to be an outlier (refer to Section 3.1.2), this value was disregarded, and the second highest concentration was selected to represent background. This was done for TKN, chromium, uranium and zinc in order to prevent the bias, introduced by a non -representative value, from influencing the inherent conservatism in the COPC selection approach. The complete compilation of sediment data is presented in Appendix B and the ecological screening of maximum chemical concentrations is presented in Appendix F. Sediment parameters that were carried forward as ecological COPCs are presented in Table 4-1. Table 4-1 Ecological COPCs in Sediment Maximum - Parameter Concentration . Metals Maximum Background Sediment Concentration ... Guideline a . Manganese 630 230 460b Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene 0.008 <0.005 0.00587 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.045 <0.005 0.0317 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.042 <0.005 0.0319 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.0071 <0.005 0.00622 4 Stantec 4.3 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Maximum Site ftP ameter Concentration (mg/kg) IN . .. Maximum Background ediment Concentration It (mg/kg) Ecological Guideline (mg/kg) Notes: < = reported detection limit CCME Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater interim sediment quality guidelines (ISQG). b OMOE Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach, May 2008; lowest effect level (LEL). Where a chemical did not have an ecologically -based guideline and all concentrations reported in a given media were within 5 -fold of the detection limit (or below the limits of detection), the chemical was assumed to be present at the Site at concentrations that would not result in unacceptable risks, and the chemical was not carried forward for further assessment. Although the maximum concentration for PHC F3 exceeded the ecological sediment guideline, exceedances were limited to the samples collected by Terrapex in 2012. Based on the most recent sediment characterization program conducted by Stantec in 2015, concentrations of PHC F3 were below the laboratory detection limit for the majority of sediment samples, with the exception three samples where PHC F3 was reported at concentrations below the sediment quality guideline. Based on the most recent sediment sampling data, PHC F3 was not carried forward as an ecological COPC in sediment. There were no sediment guidelines available for strontium and the maximum concentration was greater than background. However, the background exceedances were marginal and not likely related to historical or current activities at the Site. Therefore, strontium was not carried forward as an ecological COPC in sediment. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) and total organic carbon (TOC) were also not carried forward as ecological COPCs in sediment. Both of these parameters are indicative of the nutrient levels in the sediment, and although they can be responsible for negative effects associated with eutrophication, they are more relevant as significant modifiers of toxicity. For example, TOC in the sediment will often bind metals and adsorb organic contaminants, reducing their bioaccessibility and potential toxicity. As a result, they were considered further within the risk assessment but not in terms of their potential to have toxic effects on the benthic community. 4 Stantec 4.4 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.1.1.2 COPCs in Surface Water Maximum chemical concentrations from all the available surface water samples collected from the Site were compared to ecological health -based quality guidelines based on the following order: • CCME Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater guideline values (CCME, 2015b). • British Columbia Approved Water Quality Guidelines; protection of aquatic life (BC MOE, 2015). • Unites States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region 3 Environmental Screening Level Benchmarks for Surface Water (USEPA, 2006). Chemical concentrations were also compared to concentrations representative of local background based on samples collected by Stantec in 2015. If the maximum concentration was less than or equal to the maximum background concentration, the chemical was not carried forward as an ecological COPC. If the maximum concentration was determined to be an outlier (refer to Section 3.1.2), this value was disregarded, and the second highest concentration was selected to represent background. Specifically, concentrations that were considered anomalous include arsenic, manganese and zinc from sample SW 15-14, as well as cadmium, calcium magnesium, sodium and strontium from sample SW 15-11. The complete compilation of surface water data is presented in Appendix B and the ecological screening of maximum chemical concentrations is presented in Appendix F. Surface water parameters that were carried forward as ecological COPCs are presented in Table 4-2. Table 4-2 Ecological COPCs in Surface Water Notes: a CCME Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater. 4.1.1.3 Summary of Ecological COPCs Based on the screening of maximum sediment and surface water concentrations against applicable ecological pathway -specific guidelines, Table 4-3 provides a summary of the ecological COPCs at the Site. Stantec 4.5 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 4-3 Summary of Ecological COPCs ff Parameter LIT 1 Metals Manganese Sediment EN Yes Surface Water - Zinc - Yes Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthylene Yes - Benzo(a)anthracene Yes - Benzo(a)pyrene Yes - Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Yes - Phenanthrene Yes - Pyrene Yes - Organochlorine Pesticides DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- Yes - DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- Yes - DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- Yes - DDT Total Yes - Notes: - Indicates that a parameter was not considered an ecological COPC In summary, manganese, select PAHs and DDT (and metabolites) were identified as ecological COPCs in sediment. Only zinc was identified as an ecological COPC in surface water. To account for the additive toxic effects of PAHs, all of the reported PAHs were carried forward into the ERA. Each PAH has a common mechanism of toxicity; therefore, to conservatively assess the cumulative toxic potential of PAHs, the contribution of each element of the mixture was considered even if the individual parameter was at a concentration below its sediment quality guideline. 4.1.1.4 Ecological Screening against MOECC Guidelines Since the Site is being assessed for possible divestiture to the Municipality of Bayham (federal to provincial jurisdiction), Stantec also screened the contaminants against guidelines provided by the MOECC (OMOE, 2011; OMOE 2008) in order to accommodate this transfer. If any exceedances were observed, they were identified in Table 4-4. In sediment, eight parameters exceeded MOECC guidelines (shown in Table 4-4), two of which were not identified in the federal screening (i.e., copper and phosphorus). Phosphorous, like TKN and the TOC, is indicative of nutrient loading which would be expected in Otter Creek given its proximity to areas with intensive agriculture, and the maximum copper concentrations was only 4 Stantec 4.6 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 marginally above the sediment guideline. Therefore, although these results will not be carried forward into the ERA, neither contaminant is expected to have deleterious effects on the aquatic environment. There were no MOECC COPCs identified in surface water. See Appendix F for additional screening information. Table 4-4 MOECC Ecological COPCs in Sediment ParameterIL Maximum Site Concentration Background Maximum SedimentGuideline Concentration OECC Ecological a ' (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Amin (mg/kg) A Ad Phosphorus Organochlorine Pesticides Notes: < = reported detection limit OMOE Site Condition Standards. Table 9 -Sediment Components for Within 30m of a Water Body. b OMOE Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach, May 2008; lowest effect level (LEL). 4.1.2 Identification of Ecological Receptors For the purpose of ecological risk assessment, it is neither practical, nor necessary, to individually assess each wildlife species that may potentially occupy, visit or live near the Site. Instead, the potential for adverse effects is evaluated for a subset of wildlife receptors (referred to as Valued Ecological Components, or VECs) that may be exposed to COPCs at or near the Site. VECs are chosen by focusing on wildlife species that are: • Indigenous to the area and would be potentially exposed to Site contaminants in the sediment and/or surface water • Most likely to receive the greatest exposure to contaminants due to their habitat, behavioural traits and home range • Representative of various levels in the trophic web (e.g., carnivore, herbivore, insectivore) • Potentially at risk because they have been classified as being rare or endangered (i.e., species of conservation concern) Stantec 4.7 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Since the purpose of the ERA was to assess potential exposure to ecological receptors from COPCs in the aquatic environment at the Site (i.e., from sediment and surface water), VECs were assumed to obtain 100% of their diets from the aquatic environment. Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to ecological receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, this approach was considered conservative. The species selected as VECs for the aquatic and semi -aquatic environment are listed in Table 4-5. A brief profile for each of the semi -aquatic mammalian and avian VEC species is provided in Appendix G. Although terrestrial species may consume drinking water from the aquatic environment, the assessment of semi -aquatic receptors is considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure to sediment and surface water; therefore, terrestrial VECs were not included. Table 4-5 Summary of Valued Ecological Components Pelagic freshwater aquatic life (i.e., aquatic plants, aquatic invertebrates, amphibians and fish) and benthic invertebrates were assessed as classes rather than selecting surrogate species as representatives. This reflects the measure of exposure, the available toxicity data, and the approach used to assess the potential risks. For these organisms, the majority of dose -response data from toxicity tests relate to observed effects to the contaminant concentration in the media, and not a dose as is common with birds and mammals. As a result, exposure is based on the contaminant concentration in the media and does not rely on multi -pathway exposure modelling. Therefore, it is not necessary to choose a surrogate species for which one would have exposure factors such as body weight, food ingestion rates and diet composition. This simplified measure of exposure is acceptable because these organisms spend the majority of their time associated with a single abiotic media with which they are assumed to always be in direct contact. Stantec 4.8 sdenift Nome Semi -Aquatic VECs Birds Mallard Duck Anas platyrhynchos Aquatic plants and benthic invertebrates Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias 0 Fish and benthic invertebrates Mammals Muskrat Ondatra zibethicus • Aquatic plants and benthic invertebrates River Otter Lontra conadensis 0 Fish and benthic invertebrates Aquatic VECs Aquatic Life Associated with the Surface Water (as a class) Benthic Invertebrates (as a class) Pelagic freshwater aquatic life (i.e., aquatic plants, aquatic invertebrates, amphibians and fish) and benthic invertebrates were assessed as classes rather than selecting surrogate species as representatives. This reflects the measure of exposure, the available toxicity data, and the approach used to assess the potential risks. For these organisms, the majority of dose -response data from toxicity tests relate to observed effects to the contaminant concentration in the media, and not a dose as is common with birds and mammals. As a result, exposure is based on the contaminant concentration in the media and does not rely on multi -pathway exposure modelling. Therefore, it is not necessary to choose a surrogate species for which one would have exposure factors such as body weight, food ingestion rates and diet composition. This simplified measure of exposure is acceptable because these organisms spend the majority of their time associated with a single abiotic media with which they are assumed to always be in direct contact. Stantec 4.8 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 The assessment of aquatic life will include species of conservation concern (i.e., fish and amphibians) listed in Section 2.1.5 (Table 2-1). It also distinguishes between those organisms that primarily inhabit the water column and those that inhabit the sediment. Organisms in the water column such as algae, invertebrates, fish and amphibians were linked to COPCs identified in the surface water while benthic invertebrates were linked to the COPCs identified in the sediment. Since the primary COPCs were found in the sediment, it was assumed that the state of the benthic community acted as a suitable surrogate for the rest of the aquatic species. 4.1.3 Identification of Ecological Exposure Pathways An exposure pathway describes the movement of a COPC from the source in the environment to the eventual point of intake (exposure) by the VEC. Identifying the potential exposure pathways involves consideration of several factors. The life history traits of each VEC (e.g., habitat, diet), features of the Site (e.g., biota, habitat suitability) and environmental fate and transport properties of each COPC comprise but a few of the components taken into account when identifying potential exposure pathways. As previously discussed, a detailed assessment of exposure pathways was not necessary for freshwater aquatic organisms since their exposure is based on the contaminant concentration reported in the sediment or surface water. Therefore, summary of potential exposure pathways listed in Table 4-6 is focused on semi -aquatic mammalian and avian receptors and pathway -specific rationale for inclusion or exclusion from the ERA. Table 4-6 Exposure Pathways for Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian VECs I3 Stantec 4.9 Freshwater Aquatic Pathways Uptake from ingestion of water as a result of feeding, drinking or Water Ingestion Yes grooming is a potential source of exposure to semi -aquatic receptors. Sediment Ingestion Yes Uptake from incidental ingestion of sediment constitutes potential sources of exposure to semi -aquatic receptors. The consumption of contaminated biota such as freshwater Aquatic Biota Yes aquatic plants and invertebrates can provide a source of Ingestion exposure to semi -aquatic receptors depending on environmental fate and transport properties of COPCs. Water Dermal Dermal absorption of COPCs is not expected to provide a Absorption/Contact No relevant source of exposure to semi -aquatic receptors when compared to direct/indirect ingestion of water. I3 Stantec 4.9 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Although semi -aquatic receptors spend part of their lives within the terrestrial environment, the scope of the ERA focused on the assessment of the aquatic environment. The terrestrial environment at the Site was assessed by Stantec under separate cover. As such, semi -aquatic VECs were conservatively modelled as receiving all exposure from the aquatic environment, and terrestrial exposure pathways were omitted from the dose calculations. The opposite was done for ecological receptors within the terrestrial risk assessment and no significant risks were identified for any of the birds or mammals. Therefore, the partitioning of the exposure between the two areas of contamination would not significantly affect the results of the risk assessment, and biasing the exposure to one habitat or the other actually provides an additional element of conservatism. 4.1.4 Identification of Assessment Endpoints The assessment endpoints used in the ERA focused on aquatic and semi -aquatic organisms and the potential for chemical -specific effects that could directly result in the reduction of either the abundance or diversity of their populations and communities. These endpoints were extrapolated from multiple lines -of -evidence (LOE) as follows: 1. Viability of local semi -aquatic avian and mammalian populations • LOE 1: Food chain modelling, and • LOE 2: Quantification of tissue residues in prey (i.e., fish) species 2. Viability of the local aquatic life community • LOE 1: Surface water chemistry; • LOE 2: Sediment chemistry, and • LOE 3: Benthic community structure analysis to quantify abundance and diversity The assessment endpoints were used in the evaluation of risk with the assumption that if a significant proportion of the population/community was unaffected by chemical exposure (i.e., not significantly affected in terms of its ability to grow and survive), then the health of the population/community as a whole would also be unaffected. It was also assumed that if invertebrate abundance and diversity within the sediments was unaffected, then the health of the aquatic community as a whole would be unaffected (i.e., there will be an insignificant effect on the abundance and diversity of other species, including fish and amphibians). Biomagnifacation of COPCs was considered as part of compound specific uptake factors in the assessment of semi -aquatic birds and mammals (see Section 4.2.1). 4.1.5 Ecological Conceptual Site Model The ecological conceptual site model constructed for the ERA is presented as Figure 4-1 and provides a simplified representation of potential exposure pathways, linking COPCs to each identified VEC. Stantec 4.10 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 TransportSource Media .. Receptors Direct Exposure Uptake/IngestionAll VECs Mallard Duck Great Blue Heron Muskrat River Otter Great Blue Heron Muskrat River Otter Mallard Duck Uptake by Benthic Ingestion of Benthic Invertebrates Invertebrates Surface Water Surface Water Uptake by Fish Ingestion of Fish Uptake by Aquatic Plants Ingestion ofMuskrat Aquatic Plants All VECs All VEC� RECEPTORS Direct Exposure Uptake/Ingestion : ediment Surface Sediment Uptake by Aquatic Receptors Ingestion of Aquatic Receptors • Figure 4-1 Ecological Conceptual Site Model 4.11 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.1.6 Problem Formulation Uncertainty Evaluation Sources of uncertainty associated with the Problem Formulation tend to focus on the following: • The identification of relevant chemicals of potential concern • The identification of appropriate ecological receptors • The identification of significant exposure pathways The primary concern regarding the selection of COPCs is that relevant contaminants will have been overlooked and thus omitted from consideration within the ecological risk assessment. This concern was addressed through investigation of the Site that focused on the historical land -use and how these activities might have led to environmental contamination. Based on this information, sampling programs were designed to target areas expected to contain the highest levels of specific types of contaminants that might be in the sediment and surface water associated with the Site. Benthic invertebrate samples and fish tissue samples were also collected. The analysis of these samples included a broad range of parameters (metals, PHCs, PAHs, PCBs and OCPs) and was conducted by a certified laboratory. A review of the laboratory analytical program for the samples recovered during Site investigations indicated that QA/QC parameters (i.e., percentage recovery for matrix spike, spiked blanks, values for method blanks, and relative percent difference for analytical and field sample duplicates) were within the laboratory quality control limits. Based on the effort associated with the Site characterization, the data used to quantify the potential environmental contamination and identify COPCs was considered to be suitable for the Site. The potential uncertainty associated with the identification of COPCs was further addressed using a conservative screening approach. For the COPC screening, the environmental contaminant concentrations were represented using the maximum reported concentrations from the available data and these were compared to environmental quality standards that were identified from established regulatory authorities and chosen to be specific for ecological receptors protective of environmentally relevant endpoints. The potential uncertainty with the selection of a complete and relevant list of ecological receptors was addressed using information from previous site and biological assessments conducted at the Site and research in the primary literature. An attempt was made to include all major trophic levels. The result of the approach used to select receptors was a comprehensive list of potential VECs that considered both semi -aquatic and aquatic species, as well as species at risk. Terrestrial species were not selected as VECs due to the scope of the assessment, which included sediment and surface water impacts at the Site. However, the assessment of semi -aquatic receptors is considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure to sediment and surface water at the Site. The uncertainty associated with the selection of ecological exposure pathways stems from the potential to omit a relevant pathway that would subsequently undermine the accuracy of the predicted exposure. Overall, only certain exposure pathways were determined to be relevant; Stantec 4.12 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 therefore, the probability that a significant pathway was missed or omitted was considered to be insignificant. 4.2 EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT The objective of the Exposure Assessment was to quantify the magnitude of exposure for each receptor to each COPC. This was performed for each of the assessment endpoints identified in Section 4.1.4, which included the following: 1. Viability of local semi -aquatic avian and mammalian populations: • Exposure from ingestion of surface water and sediment • Exposure from the ingestion of aquatic food items 2. Viability of the local aquatic life community (i.e., plants, invertebrates, fish and amphibians): • Exposure from direct association with the surface water Exposure from direct association with sediments 4.2.1 Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian Populations To assess the viability of semi -aquatic avian and mammalian populations in the vicinity of the Site, the magnitude of exposure for each of these VECs, as identified in Table 4-5, was predicted based on a calculation of the total daily dose of a COPC from each of the identified exposure pathways. 4.2.1.1 Calculation of Exposure Point Concentrations An exposure point concentration (EPC) is used to represent the concentration of a chemical within each applicable medium (e.g., surface water, sediment, or food item) to which an ecological receptor is assumed to be exposed during their time at a site. For exposure media that were directly measured during the site characterization activities (e.g., surface water and sediment), the EPC was represented by a statistic derived from Site data. Where sufficient sample size permitted (i.e., n >_ 10), the 95% upper confidence limit of the mean (UCLM) was used to represent a conservative but reasonable upper limit of the EPC. Compared to the maximum value, the 95% UCLM is a better measure of the exposure an organism may experience while moving around the Site, as well as what a community of sessile organisms may experience. All 95% UCLMs were calculated using USEPA's ProUCL Version 5.0 statistical software. If more than one 95% UCLM value was recommended by ProUCL, the most conservative value was selected. ProUCL outputs are provided in Appendix L. For those COPCs with insufficient sample size to calculate the 95% UCLM (i.e., n < 10), or those with too few detectable concentrations for ProUCL to calculate a 95% UCLM, the maximum Stantec 4.13 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 value was conservatively selected as the EPC. If all values were below the detection limit, half the detection limit was selected as the EPC. For receptors such as semi -aquatic birds and mammals, which are associated with multiple exposure pathways, COPCs identified in one medium (e.g., sediment) are also considered in other applicable media (e.g., surface water), even if concentrations were below ecological guidelines or detection limits. As exposure to ecological receptors from sediment occurs on or near the surface, only surface sediment samples were used to derive the EPCs for sediment. EPCs for media not directly measured (i.e., food items such as aquatic vegetation and benthic invertebrates) are estimated for each COPC with the use of compound -specific uptake factors (UFs), which account for biomagnification. The generalized equation used to calculate a COPC concentration in biotic tissue from a media concentration is as follows: EPQ = EPCmedia X UFi where: EPC; = Exposure point concentration in target biotic tissue i (mg/kg wet weight) EPCmedia = Exposure point concentration in media (mg/kg dry weight or mg/L) UFi = Uptake factor from soil -to -wet weight target biotic tissue i (dimensionless) Uptake factors can also be represented by log -linear equations. For a number of metals (e.g., lead), the concentration of the metal in plant and animal tissue is calculated using the following generalized log -linear equation, where Bo and B, represent the intercept and slope, respectively. ln[Pb]Tissue = Bo + B, * In[Pb]soii In addition to the predicted tissue residues derived from the EPCs, fish tissue was collected at the Site (white sucker, common carp and emerald shiner; see Appendix B) and analyzed for select chemical parameters including metals and OCPs. Therefore, for those VECs where the consumption of fish was a potential exposure pathway, it was not necessary to estimate fish concentrations using the bioaccumulation models. Instead, the maximum reported concentrations for fillet (n=5) and composite samples (n=5) were selected as the EPC. For those parameters that were not analyzed in the tissue samples (e.g., PAHs), uptake factors were used to derive EPCs for fish tissue. A summary of the exposure point concentrations for all food items are presented in Appendix H. 4.2.1.2 Calculation of Average Daily Dose In order to accommodate the multiple and varying exposure pathways experienced by birds and mammals, it is necessary to estimate the rate of exposure to a COPC on a mg/kg/day basis (referred to as the average daily dose, or ADD). For each VEC, the ADD is calculated for each COPC by considering the intake from each applicable exposure pathway (e.g., sediment Stantec 4.14 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 ingestion, water ingestion and food ingestion). The generalized form for the ADD calculation is as follows: ADDi = IF x AFj x EPC where: ADDi = Average daily dose (mg chemical/kg body weight -day) IFi = Intake factor (kg contaminated media/kg body weight -day) AFi = Absorption factor (default value of 1, unless otherwise specified) EPC = Exposure point concentration (mg chemical/kg media) The intake factor is not specific to each COPC, but is dependent on the exposure media. It is calculated for each exposure pathway using the media -specific ingestion rate (IR), the fraction of the total ingestion rate from the Site (fsite) and the receptor's body weight (BW) as follows: IFj = (IRj X fsite) / BW where: IFi = Intake factor (kg contaminated media/kg body weight -day) IRi = Ingestion rate (kg contaminated media/ day) fsite = Fraction of total ingestion rate from the Site (unitless) BW = Receptor body weight (kg) The ADD is also adjusted for the predicted residency time of each semi -aquatic bird and mammal. Ecological receptors with feeding ranges larger than the area of the Site, (i.e., which is 74.54 ha for the entire water lot and 8.23 ha for the creek and harbour area (applicable to those VECs that feed along shorelines and in shallow waters)), are expected to spend some time onsite but the remainder offsite. The amount of time that a VEC is onsite and thus potentially exposed to COPCs (fsite) is assumed to be proportional to the ratio of the Site area divided by the area of the VEC's feeding range. Ecological receptors with home ranges less than the area of the Site are assumed to be present 100% of the time; the residency times for those with larger home ranges are scaled appropriately. A summary of foraging ranges provided in the FCSAP guidance (2012) and the predicted percent of time spent at the Site for each VEC are shown in Table 4-7. Table 4-7 VEC Home Ranges and Fraction of Time at the Site 4 Stantec 4.15 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Additional exposure factors for each of the semi -aquatic avian and mammalian VECs such as body weight, diet composition (plant, invertebrate and prey), water ingestion and sediment ingestion rates, are summarized in Appendix H. Calculated ADDS for each semi -aquatic mammalian and avian VEC are also summarized in Appendix H. 4.2.2 Aquatic Community The assessment of the viability of the aquatic community included both pelagic and benthic species, but was focused more on benthic invertebrates and their exposure to manganese, PAHs and DDT (and metabolites) in the sediment. For the single water-based exceedance associated with zinc, the exposure was based on the 95% UCLM in order to provide a reasonable concentration that was representative of environmental conditions. In contrast, the exposure to contaminants in the sediment for benthic invertebrates considered each discrete sediment sampling location and consequently, each sediment sample was assessed individually. This was done to accommodate meaningful comparisons with the results from the benthic community analysis, which was completed on co - located sediment samples. The potential exposure of benthic invertebrates to PAHs was based on a calculated sum of the 16 reported PAHs, where each concentration was converted to a toxic unit by dividing by the respective toxicity value identified in Section 4.3. DDT (and metabolites) was represented by the sum of the following: DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- The DDT (and metabolites) concentrations were also converted to toxic units prior to being summed. In cases where individual PAHs or DDT (and metabolites) were not found at concentrations above the laboratory detection limit, the contribution to the mixture was assumed to be zero. When summing toxic units, using the value of the detection limit or half the detection limit inflates the potential toxicity of the mixture. In some cases, as with PAHs, the addition of 16 or more non -detects, using either assumption can produce a value greater than 1 even though no PAHs were detected in the sample. This was not considered to be a desirable outcome. To avoid this, it was assumed that PAHs and DDT metabolites do not contribute significantly to the toxicity of the mixture at concentrations below the detection limit. 4 Stantec 4.16 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.2.3 Exposure Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation The Exposure Assessment represents one of the major sources of potential uncertainty within the ERA. The Exposure Assessment was conducted to provide a conservative estimate of exposure and reduce the potential that risk was underestimated. Many of the assumptions and approaches used represent a reasonable worst case scenario for individual VECs, and are considered overly conservative with respect to the exposure experienced by the population (e.g., the use of conservative exposure factors). 4.3 HAZARD ASSESSMENT The objective of the Toxicity Assessment was to evaluate the potential adverse effects associated with exposure of ecological receptors to each COPC and use this dose -response information to derive exposure limits or toxicological reference values (TRVs) that are protective of the selected VECs with regards to the assessment endpoints. A toxicity assessment is the basis for evaluating what might be an acceptable exposure level and what concentration may result in adverse environmental effects from chronic exposure to COPCs. 4.3.1 Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian Populations The avian and mammalian TRVs for the ERA are based on dose -response studies, typically conducted with laboratory animals where the lowest observed adverse effects level (LOAEL) or no observed adverse effects level (NOAEL) were quantified. In the absence of a suitable LOAEL, NOAEL-based TRVs are used. Generally, LOAELs used towards TRV derivation are based on long- term growth or survival, or sub -lethal reproductive effects determined from chronic exposure studies. As such, these endpoints are relevant to the maintenance of wildlife populations, and population health was considered as the assessment endpoint of the ERA. Numerous sources were reviewed to obtain the most relevant TRVs for ecological receptors. Information sources included, but were not limited to: • CCME Environmental Quality Guidelines supporting documentation (1996 to 2015) • Oak Ridge National Laboratory Toxicity Benchmarks for Wildlife (Sample et al., 1996) • USEPA Ecological Soil Screening documents (1996 to 2013) • Ontario MOECC (OMOE, 2011) • Primary scientific literature Semi -aquatic birds and mammals were evaluated in a species-specific manner while freshwater aquatic life (i.e., fish, aquatic invertebrates and aquatic plants) and benthic invertebrates were evaluated as classes (see Section 4.3.2). The TRVs selected for semi -aquatic mammals and birds are presented in Table 4-8 and Table 4-9, respectively. ® Stantec 4.17 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 4-8 Semi -Aquatic Mammalian Toxicity Reference Values Notes: LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level; NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level LMW = low molecular weight; HMW = high molecular weight Table 4-9 Semi -Aquatic Avian Toxicity Reference Values Test COPC Species if maim TRV jy)jF Reference Manganese multiple growth, geometric mean 179 Manganese multiple growth, geometric mean 51.5 51.5 USEPA (2007a) Zinc chicken reproduction reproduction of NOAEL USEPA (2007b) Zinc cattle reproduction chronic LOAEL 75.9 75.9 USEPA (2007b) LMW PAHs multiple growth, geometric mean 170 170 USEPA (2007c) of NOAEL reproduction of NOAEL HMW PAHs multiple growth, geometric mean 18 18 USEPA (2007c) reproduction of NOAEL DDT and multiple growth, geometric mean 0.15 0.15 USEPA (2007d) Metabolites reproduction of NOAEL Notes: LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level; NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level LMW = low molecular weight; HMW = high molecular weight Table 4-9 Semi -Aquatic Avian Toxicity Reference Values Test COPC Species if Reference j1 ... TRV jy)jF Reference Manganese multiple growth, geometric mean 179 179 USEPA (2007a) reproduction of NOAEL Zinc chicken reproduction geometric mean 89.2 89.2 USEPA (2007b) of NOAEL LMW PAHs Insufficient data exist to define TRVs for avian receptors; however, available evidence (Kapustka, 2004) suggests that mammals are generally more sensitive than birds. Therefore, if mammals are protected, birds should also be HMW PAHs adequately protected. DDT and multiple growth, geometric mean 0.23 0.23 USEPA (2007d) Metabolites reproduction of NOAEL Notes: LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level; NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level LMW = low molecular weight; HMW = high molecular weight 911M SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.3.2 Aquatic Community For assessment of the viability of the aquatic community, the potential effect of the COPCs identified in surface water (i.e., zinc) was based on comparison to the CCME Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life (i.e., 30 pg/L for zinc). For freshwater sediment, assessment of potential effects was based on comparison to the CCME Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Both the interim sediment quality guidelines (ISQG) and the probable effect levels (PEL) were used to determine not only the potential for an effect but also the magnitude. The ISQGs and PELs used in the ERA are presented in Table 4-10. Table 4-10 CCME ISQGs and the PELs for Assessment of the Aquatic Life Community Parameter Metals Manganese CCME e . 460° . 1 100° Polyaromatic hydrocarbons Acenaphthene 0.00671 0.0889 Acenaphthylene 0.00587 0.128 Anthracene 0.0469 0.245 Benzo(a)anthracene 0.0317 0.385 Benzo(a)pyrene 0.0319 0.782 Chrysene 0.0571 0.862 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.00622 0.135 Fluoranthene 0.1 1 1 2.355 Fluorene 0.0212 0.144 Methylnaphthalene, 2- 0.0202 0.201 Naphthalene 0.0346 0.391 Phenanthrene 0.0419 0.515 Pyrene 0.053 0.875 Organochlorine Pesticides DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- 0.00354 0.00851 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- 0.00142 0.00675 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- 0.0001 19 0.00477 Notes: a = No CCME guideline was available so the MOECC Sediment Standard (OMOE, 2008) was adopted as a surrogate Stantec 4.19 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 The ISQGs are suitable for the assessment of long-term exposures as they represent a concentration below which no adverse effects are expected to occur over an extended period of time. The approach used to derive the ISQG values was based on the co -incidence of observed impacts from field data, and is thus very conservative. The result is a protective ecological endpoint where an exceedance does not mean that effects are or have occurred, but rather indicates that further assessment may be required. In contrast, the PELs represent the lower limit of the range of a chemical's concentration in which adverse biological effects are usually or always observed. With both values, the ISQG and the PEL, it is possible to characterize at least three levels of potential effect: 1. Adverse Effect Likely: Exceedance of the PEL 2. Adverse Effect May or May Not Occur: Exceedance of the ISQG but less than the PEL 3. Adverse Effect Unlikely: COPC concentration in the sediment was below the ISQG The application of these levels of effect will be discussed further in the Risk Characterization section. 4.3.3 Toxicity Assessment Uncertainty Evaluation Uncertainties associated with the estimation of ecotoxicological effects of chemicals are inherent in the risk assessment process. Although receptors assessed as classes have been evaluated based on the use of toxicological data appropriate to a wide variety of species, some or all of which being inherently more sensitive to chemical stressors, sensitive species may not be present at the Site and thus toxic effects may not be observed. Another aspect not taken into account in the Toxicity Assessment is the natural adaptation of species that has been documented in areas where contamination or naturally elevated levels of chemicals are present. Species that flourish in such an environment may include tolerant species and species that naturally adapt. Stantec does not adjust NOAEL values upwards to estimate LOAEL values. Hazard quotient values, as defined in Section 4.4, with TRVs based on the NOAEL may be permitted to exceed a value of 1.0 since the NOAEL is not an endpoint that signifies toxicological effects. As indicated previously, the CCME sediment quality guidelines were derived based on the co- incidence of observed impacts, usually bioassay toxicity, with a chemical's concentration in sediment. Test materials used in the bioassays were generally obtained from field sediments associated with contaminated sites near large metropolitan areas, which were impacted with a typical mixture of metals, PAHs, PCBs and pesticides. Given the often complex mixture found in these sediments, ISQGs and PELs do not identify the causal chemical(s) in the sediments where I3 Stantec 4.20 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 impacts were observed, and the same impacted sediment samples were used to assess the correlation of toxic effects for multiple chemicals (Smith and Jones, 2006). As noted in Smith and Jones (2006), the ISQGs tended to be more indices of the chemical's "ambient" concentration in the dataset. Regressions of the ISQGs versus the 34th percentile concentrations for PAHs and the other chemicals yielded highly significant correlations suggesting that the values are indicators of a chemical's rarity or commonness, not its relative toxicity to benthos. Therefore, an exceedance of an ISQG and PEL does not mean that effects are or have occurred, but rather indicate that the compound is elevated above background. As a result, exceedances of either guideline should not be interpreted as proof of significant negative effects. 4.4 RISK CHARACTERIZATION The Risk Characterization evaluates the evidence linking COPCs with adverse ecological effects by combining information from the Exposure and Toxicity Assessments. This is performed for each of the assessment endpoints, as identified in Section 4.1.4: 1. Viability of local semi -aquatic avian and mammalian populations 2. Viability of the local aquatic life community 4.4.1 Semi -Aquatic Avian and Mammalian Populations The potential for adverse effects to semi -aquatic birds and mammals is quantified by comparing the amount of a substance that can be tolerated, below which adverse environmental effects are not expected (e.g., TRV), to the amount of a COPC an organism is expected to be exposed to, or come into contact with, on a daily basis. This is defined as the Hazard Quotient: HQ = ADD (mg/kq-d) TRV (mg/kg -d) The magnitude by which values differ from parity (e.g., TRV = daily dose, HQ = 1.0) is used to make inferences about the possibility of ecological risks. A HQ less than 1.0 indicates that the exposure concentration is less than the threshold of toxicity and there is a low probability that adverse environmental effects might occur. Given the inherent conservatism of the risk assessment approach, there is a high degree of certainty associated with this conclusion. However, a HQ value of greater than 1.0 does not automatically indicate that there is an unacceptable level of risk, only that there is a possibility of adverse ecological effects. In contrast to low HQ values, the conservative approach imparts a low degree of certainty for these conclusions and HQ values greater than 1.0 should be examined carefully. Additional investigations and assessment of multiple lines of evidence may be required to reduce conservatism and provide a more accurate assessment of the actual level of risk. If it is ultimately determined that the HQ is indeed indicating unacceptable risk, then mitigation or remediation activities may be appropriate in order to reduce risks to ecological receptors. Stantec 4.21 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 In this section, results of the quantitative evaluation of semi -aquatic avian and mammalian receptors are presented. An example calculation of how the ERA was conducted is provided in Appendix H; intake parameters, EPCs, ADDs and HQs for each semi -aquatic mammalian and avian VEC are summarized after the worked example. A summary of the HQs calculated for each semi -aquatic bird and mammal VEC is presented in Table 4-11. Table 4-11 Hazard Quotients for Semi -Aquatic VECs The results in Table 4-11 show that the hazard quotients calculated for all semi -aquatic VECs are well below 1.0 and indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. These results are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure to sediment and surface water through ingestion of surface water. To assess the potential risks to semi -aquatic receptors from potential future dredging operations in the harbour, HQs were calculated using maximum surface water and maximum sediment concentrations from all depths. The results are shown in Table 4-12 and show that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic birds and mammals from potential future dredging operations. Table 4-12 Hazard Quotients for Semi -Aquatic VECs - Potential Future Dredging .. . ..70.02 h Mallard Duck Great Blue Heron Muskrat River Otter Manganese 0.01 <0.01 0.02 Mallard Duck Great Blue Heronkrat 0.24 River Otter Manganese 0.01 <0.01 No TRV; HQ could not be calculated <0.01 <0.01 Total DDT and Zinc 0.21 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.03 0.18 Total PAHs No TRV; HQ could not be calculated <0.01 <0.01 Total DDT and <0.01 <0.01 0.10 0.03 Metabolites The results in Table 4-11 show that the hazard quotients calculated for all semi -aquatic VECs are well below 1.0 and indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. These results are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure to sediment and surface water through ingestion of surface water. To assess the potential risks to semi -aquatic receptors from potential future dredging operations in the harbour, HQs were calculated using maximum surface water and maximum sediment concentrations from all depths. The results are shown in Table 4-12 and show that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic birds and mammals from potential future dredging operations. Table 4-12 Hazard Quotients for Semi -Aquatic VECs - Potential Future Dredging Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that either the terrestrial or aquatic portion of the Port Burwell Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. 4 Stantec 4.22 ..r.=.110=1. Mallard Duck Great Blue Heron Muskrat River Otter Manganese 0.01 <0.01 0.02 <0.01 Zinc 0.24 <0.01 0.20 0.01 Total PAHs No TRV; HQ could not be calculated <0.01 <0.01 Total DDT and Metabolites <0.01 <0.01 0.11 0.03 Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that either the terrestrial or aquatic portion of the Port Burwell Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. 4 Stantec 4.22 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 4.4.2 Aquatic Community 4.4.2.1 Surface Water Chemistry As discussed in Section 4.2.2, the potential risks associated with COPCs in the surface water were assessed by comparing the 95% UCLM of the surface water concentrations to the CCME freshwater quality guideline (Table 4-13). Table 4-13 Comparison of Surface Water Maximum and 95% UCLM Concentrations against Ecological Guidelines Notes: CCME Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater. b In contrast to the approach taken with calculating HQs based on a TRV, the HQs calculated for aquatic life receptors are based on a benchmark screening approach. The HQ for zinc was less than 1 (i.e., the 95% UCLM did not exceed the applicable guideline). Therefore, exposure to zinc in surface water is not expected to result in adverse effects to aquatic receptors or the aquatic habitat at the Site. Although this is an important line of evidence, the assessment of surface water does not consider all of the COPCs identified (i.e., those in sediment) and thus does not provide definitive evidence that there is negligible risk to the aquatic life community. Both PAHs and DDT (and their metabolites) tend to partition out of water and into the sediment, and thus surface water quality does not represent a complete or accurate assessment endpoint for the health of the aquatic environment. Consequently, the viability of the aquatic life community was assessed further through risk characterization of the sediment (see the following sections). 4.4.2.2 Sediment Chemistry For each COPC within a sediment sample, a toxic unit was calculated by dividing the reported concentration by the applicable sediment guideline value. As discussed in Section 4.2.2, PAHs and DDT (and metabolites) were both assessed as the sum of their components. This sum was calculated by adding the toxic units. Where the concentration of the COPC was below the limit of detection, the contribution to the sum was assumed to be negligible and was assumed to be zero. Toxic units were calculated using both the ISQGs and the PELs. The sum of the toxic units was then used to predict the potential toxicity of the contaminant mixture in the sediment on the benthic community. The following hierarchical approach was used to categorize each sediment sample: 4 Stantec 4.23 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 • Adverse Effect Likely: The sum of the toxic units based on the PEL exceeded a value of 1.0 for one or more of the COPCs in the sample. • Adverse Effect May or May Not Occur: The sum of the toxic units based on the ISQG exceeded a value of 1.0 for one or more of the COPCs. • Adverse Effect Unlikely: The sum of the toxic units based on neither the ISQG nor the PEL exceeded a value of 1.0 for any of the COPCs. The relevant chemistry data used to calculate the toxic units are provided in Appendix B and the sediment quality benchmarks are provided in Table 4-10. Table 4-14 lists the toxic units for manganese, PAHs (as the sum) and DDT (as a sum) for the sediment samples from Big Otter Creek and Table 4-15 lists the same information for those samples taken at the mouth of the port and into Lake Erie. Based on the magnitude of the toxic units and the number of contaminated samples, DDT (and metabolites) represents the primary group potentially responsible for toxic effects. Therefore, the sample locations have been ranked from the lowest to the highest sum of DDT toxic units, in order to clearly delineate the range of potential effects associated with the samples. Table 4-14 Toxic Units by Sediment Sample for Big Otter Creek, ranked by DDT (as a sum) Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station * In contrast to the approach taken with calculating HQs based on a TRV, the HQs calculated for aquatic life receptors are based on a benchmark screening approach. b For Manganese, the no effect level (NEL) and severe effect level (SEL) were used in place of the ISQG and PEL, respectively Notes (continued): NC = Not calculated; concentrations were below the laboratory detection limits Bolded values indicate a total Hazard Quotient exceeding 1.0 4 Stantec 4.24 Manganesea Total PAH Total DDT Manganeseb Total PAH Total DDT 0.35 INC INC 0.15 NC NC + 0.48 0.15 NC 0.20 0.01 NC 0.59 0.20 1.55 0.25 0.01 0.33 0.52 1.52 1.83 0.22 0.10 0.39 0.59 1.26 2.04 0.25 0.09 0.43 0.33 2.97 2.32 0.14 0.22 0.49 • 1.02 1.27 2.61 0.43 0.08 0.55 0.67 0.69 4.08 0.28 0.04 0.86 1.13 1.82 4.58 0.47 0.11 0.96 1.37 2.30 43.45 0.57 0.14 2.29 Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station * In contrast to the approach taken with calculating HQs based on a TRV, the HQs calculated for aquatic life receptors are based on a benchmark screening approach. b For Manganese, the no effect level (NEL) and severe effect level (SEL) were used in place of the ISQG and PEL, respectively Notes (continued): NC = Not calculated; concentrations were below the laboratory detection limits Bolded values indicate a total Hazard Quotient exceeding 1.0 4 Stantec 4.24 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 4-15 Toxic Units by Sediment Sample for Lake Erie, ranked by DDT (as a sum) Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station * In contrast to the approach taken with calculating HQs based on a TRV, the HQs calculated for aquatic life receptors are based on a benchmark screening approach. b For Manganese, the no effect level (NEL) and severe effect level (SEL) were used in place of the ISQG and PEL, respectively NC = Not calculated; concentrations were below the laboratory detection limits Bolded values indicate a total Hazard Quotient exceeding 1.0 Based on the chemistry data, adverse effects to the aquatic environment are considered likely to occur as a result of exposure to DDT (and metabolites) at one station within Big Otter Creek (Station 8, SID 15-08, Figure 3, Appendix A). At this location, the sum of the toxic units derived from the PELs exceeded 1.0. An additional seven locations within the creek were categorized as having the potential to have an effect (i.e., the toxic units based on the ISQG exceeded 1.0 for one or more of manganese, total PAHs, or total DDT). The remaining sample locations, including all of those in Lake Erie and the upstream reference location, were categorized as having an unlikely potential for adverse effects on aquatic life. 4.4.2.3 Benthic Community Structure Analysis Benthic community structure analysis was conducted in order to quantify the sediment toxicity to aquatic species. It provides a direct measure of biologically relevant endpoints that can be compared with the sediment chemistry on a station -by -station basis. Potential for causality is identified based on a significant correlation between chemical characterization and the biological endpoints. In general, the benthic community structure analysis cannot be interpreted solely on categorical benchmarks of abundance and diversity. Instead, the benthic community structure at contaminated sites is compared to that at reference sites, and has to be demonstrated to be significantly different from the reference location in order to be considered to have an adverse effect on benthic community structure. For the ERA, sediment sampling stations were grouped into two locations, Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie, and reference stations were established for each. For Big Otter Creek, sediment sampling station 11 was collected upstream of the Site and was free of COPCs. Therefore, its Stantec 4.25 Manganese ° Total PAH Total DDT Manganeseb Total PAH Total DDT 0.30 NC NC 0.13 NC NC 0.46 NC NC 0.19 NC NC 0.39 NC INC 0.16 NC NC 0.35 0.18 NC 0.15 0.01 INC 0.5 NC NC 0.21 NC NC Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station * In contrast to the approach taken with calculating HQs based on a TRV, the HQs calculated for aquatic life receptors are based on a benchmark screening approach. b For Manganese, the no effect level (NEL) and severe effect level (SEL) were used in place of the ISQG and PEL, respectively NC = Not calculated; concentrations were below the laboratory detection limits Bolded values indicate a total Hazard Quotient exceeding 1.0 Based on the chemistry data, adverse effects to the aquatic environment are considered likely to occur as a result of exposure to DDT (and metabolites) at one station within Big Otter Creek (Station 8, SID 15-08, Figure 3, Appendix A). At this location, the sum of the toxic units derived from the PELs exceeded 1.0. An additional seven locations within the creek were categorized as having the potential to have an effect (i.e., the toxic units based on the ISQG exceeded 1.0 for one or more of manganese, total PAHs, or total DDT). The remaining sample locations, including all of those in Lake Erie and the upstream reference location, were categorized as having an unlikely potential for adverse effects on aquatic life. 4.4.2.3 Benthic Community Structure Analysis Benthic community structure analysis was conducted in order to quantify the sediment toxicity to aquatic species. It provides a direct measure of biologically relevant endpoints that can be compared with the sediment chemistry on a station -by -station basis. Potential for causality is identified based on a significant correlation between chemical characterization and the biological endpoints. In general, the benthic community structure analysis cannot be interpreted solely on categorical benchmarks of abundance and diversity. Instead, the benthic community structure at contaminated sites is compared to that at reference sites, and has to be demonstrated to be significantly different from the reference location in order to be considered to have an adverse effect on benthic community structure. For the ERA, sediment sampling stations were grouped into two locations, Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie, and reference stations were established for each. For Big Otter Creek, sediment sampling station 11 was collected upstream of the Site and was free of COPCs. Therefore, its Stantec 4.25 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 condition was assumed to be representative of natural background (i.e., representative of un- impacted conditions in Big Otter Creek). Likewise, sediment samples were collected within Lake Erie at stations located away from areas that may be influenced by COPCs attributed to Site activities. Sediment sampling stations 12, 13, 14 and 15 were assumed to be representative of the natural background conditions in Lake Erie. In order to validate this, the assessment included an analysis of the reference site data and its applicability to the Site sediment samples (see the following section). Assessment of Reference Data An important consideration for each reference location is the physical nature of the reference samples. Factors such as water depth, sediment substrate, and composition can be important variables that influence sediment chemistry and benthic community structure. For example, sediment containing a higher proportion of organic matter will tend to adsorb organic contaminants such as PAHs and DDT more efficiently than sediment that consists largely of coarse sand and gravel. The suitability of benthic habitat also changes significantly depending on sediment composition. Sediment that is too coarse prevents successful burrowing by invertebrates and might offer greatly reduced amounts of organic material on which these animals can feed. The depth of the water over the sediment can influence light penetration thus influencing plant growth and food availability to benthic invertebrates, as well as mixing rates that in turn affect oxygen concentrations within the water column. Therefore, in order to provide meaningful comparisons, it is important for the physical characteristics of the reference locations to be similar to those of the sampling locations within the study area. The comparison considers the nature of the substrate found within each of the samples, including total organic carbon (TOC). If select characteristics for samples from the reference locations are similar to the contaminated samples, then the reference samples are considered to be suitable for comparison. Otherwise, additional scrutiny needs to be applied to any conclusions that rely on the reference samples. A summary of the quantified physical characteristics associated with samples from Big Otter Creek, Lake Erie and their reference samples (Station 11 and 12-15, respectively) are provided in Table 4-16 and Table 4-17, respectively. In most cases, the values for the Big Otter Creek stations were larger than that displayed by the single reference location (Station 11). Upstream stations within Big Otter Creek were dominated by fine sand whereas farther downstream (Stations 1, 8 and 9), substrates were finer and dominated by silt. Lake Erie Stations were dominated by hard - packed fine sand and the values for the exposure station (Station 3) were roughly similar to the reference stations. Locating areas that provided suitable reference data is generally a challenge, making it difficult to capture the variability within Big Otter Creek. However, the objective of screening the reference data is to avoid using sampling locations that are notably different compared to the Site. This would tend to bias the comparison and reduce the conservatism of the approach. Based on the data summarized in Table 4-16 and Table 4-17, this was generally accomplished, Stantec 4.26 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 with the exception of the proportion of clay and silt, and the TOC measured in various sediments. Table 4-16 Physical Characteristics of Samples within the Reference Locations and Exposure Locations in Big Offer Creek Physical Characteristics Erie - Stations 13* .. Otter Creek q Sampling Depth m 1.75 3 2.75 1.4 1.25 1.25 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.2 Moisture % 16 23 22 21 26 31 36 22 17 25 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen fag/g 136 218 448 200 502 391 961 409 103 310 Total Organic Carbon % 0.55 0.47 0.47 0.43 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.30 0.22 0.40 Clay % 0.99 0.5 6.38 4.31 11.0 14.8 23.2 5.62 2.16 2.63 Silt % 9.92 13.4 28.0 29.5 43.4 57.0 63.7 37.3 24.4 29.8 Fine Sand % 65.6 84.1 64.7 65.8 41.0 26.3 12.8 55.6 72.3 67.2 Medium Sand % 23.4 1.95 0.81 0.26 4.42 1.73 0.20 1.41 1.07 0.23 Coarse Sand % 0.00 0_,0_0F0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station Table 4-17 Physical Characteristics of Samples within the Reference Locations and Exposure Locations in Lake Erie Physical 11 Characteristics Erie - Stations 13* 1 Sampling Depth m 2 3.8 4.2 1.3 1.9 Moisture % 20 17 20 20 17 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen pg/g 66 51 60 77 74 Total Organic Carbon % 2000 3900 4100 2900 2500 Clay % 0.5 0.5 0.52 0.51 0.5 Silt % 2.32 10.72 10.83 9.57 26.55 Fine Sand % 95.28 87.98 88.33 87.55 70.74 Medium Sand % 1.89 0.28 0.07 2.14 1.45 Coarse Sand % 0.00 0.52 0.25 0.24 0.76 Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station Stantec 4.27 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Benthic Community Structure Analysis The number of taxa and number of individuals within each taxon were used to characterize the abundance and diversity of the Benthic community associated with each sampling location. The health of an ecosystem is often associated with both an abundant and a diverse group of organisms. The use of taxonomic or biotic indices provides a standardized approach to quantifying these attributes. A number of taxonomic indices were available, each with its own strengths and limitations, thus, the use of multiple taxonomic indices provides a more complete analysis of the data. The most common benthic community indices include the following: • Total Number of Organisms (density) • Total Number of Taxa (taxonomic richness) • Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) • Simpson Indices • Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (EPT) Richness • % Oligochaetes and Chironomids An overview and descriptions of the various indices are provided in the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Community Report, which has been included in Appendix J. Table 4-18 and Table 4-19 provide a summary of the Benthic community assessment for each of the samples from Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie, respectively. Table 4-18 Benthic Community Analysis Index Values for Sediment Sampling Stations BenthicIndices• 16,034 35,417 30,963 21,394 18,261 8,376 603 Density 19,828 15,560 32,601 (organisms per m2) Taxa Richness 9 19 15 20 15 16 21 18 14 16 Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 9.66 9.53 9.9 9.13 9.72 9.82 9.38 9.73 9.82 7.98 Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very HBI Interpretation Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor EPT Richness 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 Simpson's Evenness 0.251 0.186 0.219 0.238 0.276 0.159 0.112 0.124 0.18 0.452 Index Simpson's Diversity 0.557 0.717 0.696 0.789 0.758 0.557 0.575 0.551 0.603 0.862 Index Oligochaetes 94.5 86.8 95.7 76.2 93.3 91.7 87 91 94.9 50 Chironomids 4.9 8.1 3.5 21.3 6.2 6.5 9.7 5.7 3.9 19 Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station 4 Stantec 4.28 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 4-19 Benthic Community Analysis Index Values for Sediment Sampling Stations IndicesBenthic Density (organisms per m2) 29 43 14 57 172 Taxa Richness 2 1 1 2 3 Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 8 10 8 9.5 9.82 HBI Interpretation Poor Very Poor Poor Very Poor Very Poor EPT Richness 0 0 0 0 0 Simpson's Evenness Index 1 1 1 0.8 0.471 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.5 0 0 0.375 0.292 % Oligochaetes 0 100 0 75 83.3 % Chironomids 50 0 100 25 8.3 Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station A detailed analysis of the Benthic community data was conducted by Stantec and presented in the Benthic Macroinvertebrate Community Report, which has been included in Appendix J. A summary of the results is presented in the following sections. Density The high densities observed at the Big Otter Creek stations suggest appreciable eutrophication at these sites resulting from nutrient inputs, as supported by the relatively high Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) concentrations (compared to the Lake Erie stations). The low densities of organisms at the Lake Erie stations may reflect a more oligotrophic environment. However, the reductions there are more likely a result of substrate effects. Fine, packed sand does not provide ideal habitat for Benthic organisms. Taxa Richness Taxa richness was consistently higher at Big Otter Creek Stations and lower in Lake Erie Stations. The low richness values in the Lake Erie communities are likely a result of substrate effects as the fine, packed sand does not provide ideal habitat for Benthic organisms. Taxa richness was higher in the softer substrates of the creek communities. However, values ranging between 9 and 21 are lower than would be expected in an un -impacted watercourse of this size. Taxa richness fluctuated between this range throughout the Big Otter Creek Stations and no specific trend in taxa richness was observed. Impacts appear to be systemic and are likely related to general eutrophication effects. ® Stantec 4.29 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Hilsenhoff Biotic Index Hilsenhoff Biotic Indices were relatively high throughout all stations assessed at the Site, which indicates that water quality was poor to very poor with very significant to severe organic pollution. As the HBI scores were very high at all stations, impairment from nutrient inputs appears to be a systemic issue and likely reflects effects of agriculture within the watershed. EPT Taxa Richness The taxonomic richness of EPT organisms was low for all stations, ranging between 0 and 2 EPT taxa. The benthic communities at Lake Erie stations contained no pollution -sensitive taxa. These low EPT taxa richness values suggest that water and sediment quality within the Study Area were relatively poor with little habitat complexity and low habitat stability. Simpson Evenness Index Simpson's Evenness Index values are lower when communities are less balanced and dominated by only a few taxa (index range: 0 to 1, with 1 representing an evenly balanced community). Typically, the more evenly distributed the taxa are within a benthic community, the more stable the environment and the better the water and habitat quality. When taxa richness and density are low, the calculation for Simpson's Evenness can return variable or contrary results. Communities with very few organisms are not indicative of good water or habitat quality, despite having high Simpson's Evenness values. Sediment sampling stations 3, 12, 13, 14 and 15 had very low density and diversity and the resulting Simpson's Evenness values were misleadingly high. Of the remaining stations, station 10 had the highest Simpson's Evenness value. Simpson's Evenness was the lowest at stations 1, 8, 9 and 2 which corresponds to the areas of highest organic material and finest substrate particle size and reflects the dominance of benthic communities by pollution -tolerant oligochaetes in these areas. Simpson's Diversity Index Simpson's Diversity Index values are lower when communities are less taxonomically diverse (Index range: 0 to 1, with 1 representing a diverse community). As with the Simpson's Evenness calculations, Simpson's Diversity calculated for communities with low taxa richness and low density can return variable or contrary results. Lower diversity was observed at Stations 1, 8, 9 and 2, corresponding to areas dominated by soft silt, where oligochaetes dominated the benthic assemblage. The community at Station 10 had the highest Simpson's Diversity Index value which suggests that the community at this Station was more diverse (i.e., suggestive of better water quality and habitat quality). Oligochaetes and Chironomids The makeup of the benthic community structure may be indicative of environmental stress when a single species or group comprises dominates the community. The majority of the stations were dominated by Oligochaete taxa which accounted for 50% to100% of the individuals found. These worm communities were predominantly comprised of pollution tolerant taxa, and are good indicators of organic pollution and nutrient inputs. ® Stantec 4.30 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Chironomids represented a relatively small proportion of the assemblages at most Stations but were typically the next -largest contributor to community composition. The chironomid communities in the creek Stations were dominated by relatively pollution -tolerant taxa. Summary of Benthic Community Data The benthic macroinvertebrate communities assessed in the Port Burwell study area are primarily influenced by substrate composition and impacts from high nutrient availability. All Big Otter Creek stations showed evidence of water quality impairment in the form of eutrophication, suggesting upstream inputs of nutrients from agricultural sources. No evidence of point sources of toxic effects was present within the Benthic data. The soft, fine, silt sediments at sediment sampling stations 7, 1, 8 and 9 were highest in TOC and contained communities dominated by pollution -tolerant oligochaete taxa. A shift in community composition at Station 10 may reflect inputs of effluent from the nearby Wastewater Treatment Facility outfall or may be a result of the relatively variable water quality within the Big Otter Creek/Lake Erie transitional mixing zone. Lake Erie Benthic communities were generally impoverished, with low density and diversity, due primarily to the presence of hard -packed, fine, sand substrates that are not ideal habitats for most Benthic organisms. Consideration of Benthic Community Structure Data within the Decision Matrix The primary purpose of calculating the biotic indices is to investigate the state of sediment health within the study area, but they also provide a quantitative approach for assessing concentration -response relationships. Within the "Decision Matrix" developed by Chapman et al. (2008), significant emphasis is placed on assessment of the Benthic community. The procedure defines three categories to assess Benthic alteration in comparison to a reference site, including "negligible to low effect size", "moderate effect size", and "severe effect size". Each index is initially screened based on the following: • Low effect size - change in index value is below 20% compared to reference • Moderate effect size - change in index value is between 20-50% compared to reference • Severe effect size - change in index value is >50% compared to reference The sampling locations are then categorized and ranked based on the number of indices effect size categories and incorporated into the decision matrix as a weight -of -evidence ranking. 4.4.2.4 Decision Matrix Based on Weight -of -Evidence Ranking The lines of evidence incorporated into the decision matrix were applied on a station -by -station basis for the Site, but the initial assessment focuses on those sampling locations that were predicted to pose a potential environmental risk based on their chemical characteristics. This was performed to facilitate the assessment of causation with respect to the COPCs within the sediment. Based on the assessment of sediment chemistry, DDT (and its metabolites) represented the primary group potentially responsible for toxic effects. Therefore, sediment sample locations in the compiled data summary tables (Table 4-20 and Table 4-21 for Big Otter I3 Stantec 4.31 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Creek and Lake Erie, respectively) are ordered from the lowest sum DDT hazard quotient to the highest. For Big Otter Creek, the taxa richness, Hilsenhoff Biotic index, Simpson's Diversity index, EPT richness, and % oligochaetes calculated for each sample were all indistinguishable from the reference location (i.e., the change in index value was less than 20% of the reference). As a result, they were not presented in Table 4-20. For Lake Erie, an effect was seen in density, taxa richness, and % Chironomids (see Table 4-21). Table 4-20 Compiled Data Summary Table for Big Otter Creek Sediment Sampling Locations Station Type Station ID etal. ® Chemistry PAHs Benthic Dem Community meson's venness Index Analysis Chironomids • • • ® ' • � .� .. StationReference ®®®®® o®®v® m®ooa o®aa® : Creek Stations - 0000® • a®000 • o®®a® 0000® • 0000® • Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station Chemistry Data: « Indicates below ISQG; o Indicates moderate effect size (exceeds ISQG but below PEL); • Indicates severe effect size (exceeds ISQG and PEL) Benthic Data: Indicates negligible to low effect size (below 20%); o Indicates moderate effect size (20-50%); • Indicates severe effect size (>50%), relative to reference Stantec 4.32 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 Table 4-21 Compiled Data Summary Table for Lake Erie Sediment Sampling Locations W ♦ Benthic Community Analysis Chemistry Station ID Taxa Station Type Metals 110CPSI . ensi F M Number of '7o Endpoint M. EN= Unique Chironomids . Reference Stations Lake Stations Notes: * Indicates a reference sample station Chemistry Data: « Indicates below ISQG; o Indicates moderate effect size (exceeds ISQG but below PEL); • Indicates severe effect size (exceeds ISQG and PEL) Benthic Data: Indicates negligible to low effect size (below 20%); o Indicates moderate effect size (20-50%); • Indicates severe effect size (>50%), relative to reference 4.4.3 Risk Characterization Summary The lines of evidence presented in Table 4-20 and Table 4-21 were ordered according to the potential for effects predicted by the sediment chemistry. This provides an initial screen for causal relationships with the expectation to observe an increased incidence of significant negative effects within the benthic indices with increasing predicted effects based on the toxic units. This was only the case in Big Otter Creek for the Simpson's Evenness index. The two primary indices (density and total richness) showed no significant pattern and many of the other indices showed no significant effects relative to the controls. A more detailed graphical analysis revealed that there was a positive relationship between the Benthic indices and the concentration of the COPCs. That is, the abundance and diversity of the benthic community increased with increasing concentrations of COPCs (refer to Figure 4-2 for an example for Manganese, and Appendix K for the complete series of graphs for PAHs and DDT). This is unlikely to be a hormetic effect (i.e., the biological phenomenon whereby a beneficial effect results from exposure to low doses of an agent that is otherwise toxic) and further analysis indicates that this was a secondary effect of the relationship between COPC concentrations and other physical and chemical characteristics of the sediment. 4 Stantec 4.33 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 40000 35000 30000 N E 25000 E .E no 20000 0 T r 15000 a 0 10000 5000 0 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 Manganese HQs (SELs) Figure 4-2 Density of Benthic Organisms (Abundance) as a Function of Manganese Hazard Quotients The toxic potential for manganese and the organic contaminants (sum of PAH and sum of DDT) were found to be directly proportional to the proportion of clay, and to a lesser extent, silt and TOC (refer to Figure 4-3 for an example, and Appendix K for the complete series of graphs). The relationship for the sum of PAHs and sum of DDT and metabolites was not linear, but the highest sum PAH/DDT HQs based on exceedance of the PELs were associated with the samples containing higher proportions of clay, silt and TOC. For manganese, the relationship between toxic units and proportion of clay and silt were linear, with exceedances of the Severe Effect Limit (SEL) strongly associated with the proportion of clay and silt in the sample. The relationship between manganese and TOC was not linear, but the higher HQs for manganese were typically associated with higher sediment TOC. ® Stantec 4.34 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 0.70 Me.� 0.50 J W H 6 0.40 x v v 0.30 c m 0.20 0.10 13 Figure 4-3 Manganese Hazard Quotients (based on Severe Effect Levels) as a Result of Clay As discussed in the benthic report (Appendix J), it was concluded that the physical nature of the sediment as well as nutrient loading to the aquatic environment were the primary factors influencing the benthic community. Abundance and diversity tended to respond favourably to higher silt and clay versus compacted sand, as well as higher nutrient availability. Since the COPCs were also associated with these conditions, they show similar trends. Although the Simpson's Evenness Index appears to be negatively correlated with increasing contaminant concentrations, this is also attributed to the influence of the same physical characteristics. Figure 4-4 to Figure 4-6 illustrate the correlation between the Simpson's Evenness Index and the proportion of clay and silt, as well as the TOC measured at the various sediment sampling stations. The results show that the increase in abundance and diversity observed from sample to sample was not a consequence of the COPC concentrations, and it is unlikely that the COPCs are having a significant influence on the benthic community at the Site. ® Stantec 4.35 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 1.20 1.00 X 0.80 c in 0.60 c v LU LU �n 0.40 C 0 IA CL E 0.20 in -0.20 % Clay Figure 4-4 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Clay 911 Figure 4-5 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt 4 Stantec 4.36 1.20 ♦ 1.00 ♦ RZ = 0.4516 ,0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70 x 0.80 0.60 c v W 0.40 !^ c 0 CL 0.20 in 0.00 0 1. .0 -0.20 % Silt Figure 4-5 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt 4 Stantec 4.36 ♦ ♦ RZ = 0.4516 ,0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70 Figure 4-5 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt 4 Stantec 4.36 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 1.20 1.00 x a v 0.80 v c c 0.60 LU c CL 0.40 E N 0.20 1 11 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 TOC (mg/kg) Figure 4-6 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and Total Organic Carbon The data set was not of sufficient size to effectively remove the influence of each of the confounding factors (i.e., % silt, %clay, % TOC and TKN). The result was a perceivable inverse relationship but no statistical significance. This further supports the conclusion that the benthic community is not being significantly influenced by the COPCs and the physical/nutrient characteristics are the primary factor resulting in differences in benthic community structure between stations. 4.4.4 Risk Characterization Uncertainty Evaluation The risk characterization step in the risk assessment integrates the information from the Problem Formulation, the Exposure Assessment and the Toxicity assessment. As a result, it is subject to all of the uncertainties already discussed. However, the use of multiple lines of evidence to investigate a causal relationship between the sediment quality and indices of environmental quality rely on a number of assumptions which also contribute to the uncertainty. These assumptions include the following: The TRVs act as an accurate benchmark for the effects noted with the benthic indices. • The reference stations provide a suitable benchmark for evaluating the benthic characteristics quantified within the Site area. • The physical and chemical characteristics of the sediment were complete in representing the contributing factors to the state of the benthic community. 4 Stantec 4.37 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Ecological Risk Assessment September 11, 2015 • The COPCs do not interact, other than within their own chemical classes (i.e., the toxic potential of manganese does not contribute to that of the PAHs or DDT (and metabolites)). Additional samples would reduce the uncertainty with most of these assumptions, but the study area is relatively large and diverse with each sediment sampling station having its own dynamic. Effort was made to accommodate this during the field program and subsequent analysis but a number of factors including sediment type and time of the year influenced how representative the data was. In many respects, the sampling program provided only a "snapshot". However, the potential toxicity of sediments predicted to be of concern were identified based on the presence of chemical parameters that exceeded either the ISQGs or the PELs. As previously discussed, the uncertainty and inherent conservatism in both of these environmental quality values results in the possibility that toxicity will not be observed even when chemical concentrations are found above their respective benchmarks. The fact that there was no clear relationship between the predicted toxicity and any observed adverse effects to the benthic community structure in samples collected within the Port Burwell study area, suggests that the chemical quality of the sediment is of minor importance and the results reflect other causal factors (e.g., physical/nutrient conditions of the sediment). 4.5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The results of the ERA indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. These results are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure through the ingestion of surface water. Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. The viability of the aquatic health community was assessed using a weight -of -evidence approach. Taking into consideration the results of the surface water chemistry, sediment chemistry and benthic community analysis, two of the three lines of evidence indicate that there are no significant effects on the aquatic life community. Based on a comparison of the sediment physical characteristics with the COPC toxic potential and benthic community indices, the strongest influence on potential adverse effects appears to be substrate composition, mainly the proportion of clay and silt, and the concentration of TOC. Consequently, the COPCs identified at the Site are not expected to pose unacceptable adverse effects to the viability of the aquatic community within Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie within the study area. ® Stantec 4.38 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Summary September 11, 2015 5.0 Summary The purpose of the site-specific human health and ecological risk assessment (SSRA) was to identify the presence or absence of impacts to sediment and surface water at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario, to determine whether or not concentrations of contaminants of potential concern (COPCs) pose unacceptable risk to human or ecological receptors. The SSRA was completed using sediment, surface water, benthic invertebrate, and fish data collected by Terrapex in 2012, and Stantec in 2015. For the human health risk assessment (HHRA), thallium, zirconium, and benzo(a)pyrene exceeded the guidelines for inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with surface water, and cobalt, iron, and uranium exceeded selected guidelines in fish tissue. In addition, acenaphthylene, and pyrene in sediment exceeded the selected sediment guideline for potential bioaccumulation in fish tissue. These COPCs were carried forward into the HHRA. The results of the HHRA suggest that there are no risks to the selected human receptors (Toddler Site Visitor, and Adult Site Visitor) due to inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site; exposure to all identified non -carcinogenic COPCs from soil resulted in HQs less than the target benchmark of 0.2. For the Adult Site Visitor, chronic inadvertent ingestion of surface water, chronic dermal contact with water, and ingestion of fish from the Site resulted in an estimated cancer risk greater than 1 -in -100,000, the risk level considered to be "essentially negligible" by Health Canada. The fish consumption pathway was the primary exposure pathway for this estimated cancer risk. However, given the numerous conservative assumptions necessary in the exposure and risk estimation process, Stantec anticipates that actual on -Site risks posed by benzo(a)pyrene are negligible. Overall, the results suggest that there are likely no risks to human receptors due to exposure to sediment, surface water, or consumption of fish at the Site. For the ecological risk assessment (ERA), manganese, select PAHs and DDT (and metabolites) in sediment, and zinc in surface water were carried through for risk assessment. The results of the ERA indicate that there are no unacceptable risks to semi -aquatic receptors from surface sediment and surface water at the Site. This includes the potential for DDT and its metabolites to biomagnify in the food chain, thus resulting in a higher level of exposure for the top predators. Concentrations measured in fish tissue did not represent a concern to piscivorous birds and mammals. The results of the ERA are also considered protective of terrestrial receptor exposure through the ingestion of surface water. Given that the results of the assessment of the terrestrial environment (provided by Stantec under separate cover) determined that there were no risks to terrestrial receptors from soil or groundwater at the Site, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. ® Stantec 5.1 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Summary September 11, 2015 The viability of the aquatic health community was assessed using a weight -of -evidence approach. Taking into consideration the results of the surface water chemistry, sediment chemistry and benthic community analysis, two of the three lines of evidence indicate that there are no significant effects on the aquatic life community. The bioaccumulative potential of the COPCs was also assessed within fish but the results were more relevant to the assessment of birds and mammals than to the fish themselves as tissue -based toxicity limits were not available. Based on a comparison of the sediment physical characteristics with the COPC toxic potential and benthic community indices, the strongest influence on potential adverse effects appears to be substrate composition, mainly the proportion of clay and silt, and the concentration of TOC. Consequently, the COPCs identified at the Site are not expected to pose unacceptable adverse effects to the viability of the aquatic community within Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie within the study area. The results of the Preliminary Quantitative Human Health Risk Assessment and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (PQRA/SLERA) of the terrestrial environment (Stantec, 2015) determined that there were no human health risks to the selected human receptors due to direct exposure pathways (i.e., soil ingestion, soil dermal contact, inhalation of suspended soil particulate) for all non -carcinogenic and carcinogenic COPCs. Similarly, the results of the SLERA suggested that there are no significant risks to aquatic or terrestrial receptors at the Site, including species of conservation concern, from soil or groundwater at the Site. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the Site poses unacceptable risks to terrestrial or semi -aquatic birds or mammals from soil, groundwater, sediment or surface water. Overall, these results suggest that there are no human health risks to any of the human receptors due to inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with Site surface water, and consumption of fish caught at the Site, and no risks to ecological receptors due to COPCs identified in sediment and surface water at the Site. Based on the results of the SSRA and the current land use, no further work and no remedial actions are currently being proposed for the Site. However, should the land use of the Site change, further environmental assessment may be required to confirm the absence of risks (i.e., to confirm acceptable sediment and/or surface water quality). ® Stantec 5.2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Closure September 11, 2015 6.0 Closure This report has been prepared for the sole benefit of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The report may not be used by any other person or entity without the express written consent of Stantec Consulting Ltd. and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada. This report documents work that was completed in accordance with generally accepted professional standards at the time the services were provided. No other representations, warranties or guarantees are made concerning the accuracy or completeness of the data or conclusions contained within this report, including no assurance that this work has uncovered all potential liabilities associated with the identified property. This risk assessment was undertaken exclusively for the purpose outlined herein and was limited to those contaminants, exposure pathways, receptors, and related uncertainties specifically referenced in this report. This work was specific to the sites conditions and land use considerations described herein. All information received from the client or third parties in the preparation of this report has been assumed by Stantec to be correct. Stantec assumes no responsibility for any deficiency or inaccuracy in information received from others. The opinions in this report can only be relied upon as they relate to the condition of the portions of the identified property that were assessed at the time the work was conducted. Activities at the property subsequent to Stantec's assessment may have significantly altered the property's condition. Stantec cannot comment on other areas of the property that were not assessed. Conclusions made within this report consist of Stantec's professional opinion as of the time of the writing of this report, and are based solely on the scope of work described in the report and the limited data available. They are not a certification of the property's environmental condition. This report should not be construed as legal advice. This report has been prepared for the client identified herein and any reliance by any third party is strictly prohibited. Stantec assumes no responsibility for losses, damages, liabilities or claims, howsoever arising, from third party use of this report. For this report, the sampling was limited to specific areas and the analytical program was limited to the determination of the specific parameters indicated. The conclusions are based on the site conditions encountered at the time the field work was performed at the specific testing and/or sampling locations, and conditions may vary among sampling locations. In addition, analysis was carried out for only a limited number of chemical parameters, and it should not be inferred that other chemical species are not present. This document describes only the applicable risks associated with the identified environmental hazards, and is not intended to imply a risk-free Site. The identification of non -environmental risks to structures or people on the site is beyond the scope of this assessment. Stantec N. SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Stantec Quality Management Program September 11, 2015 Should additional information become available which differs significantly from our understanding of conditions presented in this report, Stantec specifically disclaims any responsibility to update the conclusions in this report. 7.0 Stantec Quality Management Program This report, entitled Site -Specific Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment of Sediment at Port Burwell prepared for DFO, dated September 11, 2015, was produced by Stantec Consulting Ltd. This report was written by the following individuals: Alicia Wierzbicka, M.Env.Sc. Project Manager, Risk Assessor (A - Signature Alvin Leung, M.Env.Sc. Risk Assessor Signature Alexis Fast, M.E.Des. Risk Assessor Signature This report was reviewed by the following individuals: Mark Richardson, Ph.D. Senior Risk Assessment Specialist Signature Stantec ,n - Ulysses Klee, Ph.D. Senior Risk Assessment Specialist 0�& Signature 7.2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL References September 11, 2015 8.0 References Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1995. Toxicological Profile for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Available online at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp69.pdf. Atlantic PIRI (Atlantic Partnership in RBCA Implementation). 2012. Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Version 3.0, Ecological Screening Protocol for Petroleum Impacted Sites in Atlantic Canada. July 2012. British Columbia Ministry of Environment (BC MOE). 2015. Approved Water Quality Guidelines. Available online at: http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/topic.page?id=044DD64C7E24415D83DO74309641 13C9. Buchman, M.F. 2008. NOAA Screening Quick Reference Tables, NOAA OR&R Report 08-1, Seattle, Washington, Office of Response and Restoration Division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 34 pages. Chapman, P., Environment Canada and Ontario Ministry of the Environment. 2008. Canada -Ontario Decision -Making Framework for Assessment of Great Lakes Contaminated Sediment. March 2008. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (COME). 2015a. Canadian Soil Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Environmental and Human Health. Accessed March 2015 at http://cegg- rcqe.ccme.ca/. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2015b. Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Accessed March 2015 at http://cegg-rcge.ccme.co/. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2015c. Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life. Accessed March 2015 at http://cegg-rcge.ccme.ca/. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 2008a. Canada Wide Standards for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PHC) in Soil: Scientific Rationale. January 2008. PN 1399. ISBN 978-1-896997-77-3. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 1997. A Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment (Technical Appendices). Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). 1996. A Framework for Ecological Risk Assessment (General Guidance). Dufour, AP., Evans, O., Behymer, TD., and R. Cantu. 2006. Water ingestion during swimming activities in a pool: A pilot study. Journal of Water Health p. 425-430. Eisler R. 1987. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review. Biological Report 85(1.11), Contaminant Hazard Reviews Report No. 11. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Laurel, MD. Dated May 1987. Stantec a SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL References September 11, 2015 Environment Canada. 2012. Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance. Report prepared by Azimuth Consulting Group for Environment Canada. March 2012. Health Canada. 2010a. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part I: Guidance on Human Health Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PQRA), Version 2.0. Revised 2012. Health Canada. 2010b. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part 11: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors, Version 2.0. Health Canada. 2010c. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada Part V: Guidance on Human Health Detailed Quantitative Risk Assessment for Chemicals (DQRAChem). Health Canada. 2014. Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. Summary Table. October 2014. Kapustka, L.A. 2004. Establishing Eco-SSLs for PAHs: Lessons Revealed from a Review of Literature on Exposure and Effects to Terrestrial Receptors. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 10:185-205. MacViro Consultants Inc. (MacViro). 2001. Enhanced Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Site No. 4766, Port Burwell, Ontario. March 2001. McCarthy JF, LW Burrus, VR Tolbert. 2003. Bioaccumulation of Benzo(a)pyrene from Sediment by Fathead Minnows: Effects of Organic Content, Resuspension and Metabolism. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 45, 364-370. MacDonald, DD, Berger, T., Wood, K., Brown, J., Johnsen, T., Haines, ML., Brydges, K., MacDonald, MJ., Smith, SL., and DP. Shaw. 2000. Compendium of Environmental Quality Benchmarks. MOECC (Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change; formerly OMOE). 2011. Rationale for the Development of Soil and Groundwater Standards for use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. April 2011. MOECC (formerly OMOE). 2008. Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach. May 2008. MOECC (formerly OMOE). 2006. Technical Support Document for Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines. Sample, B.E., D.M. Opresko, and G.W. Suter II. 1996. Toxicological Benchmarks for Wildlife: 1996 Revision. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN. ES/ER/TM-86/. Smith, D.W., and S.M. Jones. 2006. It's time to abandon co -occurrence sediment quality benchmarks (SQBs). Learned Discourse, Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. March 2006. SNC Lavalin Inc. (SNC). 2015. Supplemental Phase II/III ESA, Port Burwell Automation Building, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated March 2014, completed by SNC-Lavalin. Stantec 8.2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL References September 11, 2015 Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec). 2015. Preliminary Quantitative Human Health Risk Assessment and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment of Soil and Groundwater at Port Burwell. Sept. 2015. Stantec. 2012. Assessment of Environmental Risks for Municipality of Bayham at Port Burwell. March 2012. Statistics Canada. 2010. Ecoregion profile: Lake Erie Lowland. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/16-002-x/2010001 /article/1 1135-eng.htm Statistics Canada. 2008. Fish caught and kept by resident anglers, 2005. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/1 6-002-x/2008002/t/5212690-eng. htm Suter 11, GW (ed). 2007. Ecological risk assessment. CRC Press. Boca Raton, FL. Terrapex Environmental Ltd. (Terrapex). 2013. Phase 1/11 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Port Burwell, Ontario. July 10, 2013. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). 2014. Texas Risk Reduction Program (TRRP) Protective Concentration Levels (PCLs). Updated November 2014. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). 2007. Compounds for which Calculation of a Human Health Protective Concentration Level (PCL) is Not Required. March 30, 2007. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2015a. Mid -Atlantic Region Risk -Based Concentrations (RBC). Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/reg3hwmd/risk/human/rb- concentration_table/Generic_ Tables/index.htm. USEPA. 2015b. Technical Overview of Ecological Risk Assessment. Accessed March 2015 at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefedl /ecorisk_ders/toera_analysis_eco.htm. USEPA. 2014. Draft Update of Human Health Ambient Water Quality Criteria: Benzo(a)Pyrene 50-32-8. Office of Science and Technology, Office of Water, USEPA, Washington, DC. Dated May 2014. USEPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition. National Center. USEPA. 2009. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Database: Thallium(I) soluble salts; CASRN Various. for Environmental Assessment, Washington, DC; EPA/600/R-09/052F. Available from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA, and online at http://www.epa.gov/ncea/efh. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2007a. Ecological Soil Screening Levels for Manganese, Interim Final. April 2007. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ecossl/pdf/eco-ssl_manganese.pdf. Stantec 8.3 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL References September 11, 2015 United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2007b Ecological Soil Screening Levels for Zinc, Interim Final. June 2007. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ecossl/pdf/eco- ssl_Zinc.pdf. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2007c Ecological Soil Screening Levels for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), Interim Final. June 2007. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ecossl/pdf/eco-ssl_pah.pdf. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2007d Ecological Soil Screening Levels for DDT and Metabolites, Interim Final. April 2007. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/ecotox/ecossl/pdf/eco-ssl_ddt.pdf. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2006. Region 3 Freshwater Screening Benchmarks. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/reg3hscd/risk/eco/btag/sbv/fw/screenbench.htm. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2004. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund Volume I: Human Health Evaluation Manual. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. Risk Assessment Forum. EPA/630/R-95/002F. April 1998. Stantec 8.4 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix A Figures September 11, 2015 Figures ® Stantec A.1 Lake Huron London 7KEYP / Lake Erie Vienna Pon Stanley � a ! 1:3,000,000 Fulton StreetL� { m �I I p/dnk �a Line 0 a 3i II Q I }- m II Port Burwell ,.Provincial Park Q�•:= Pon Burwell Jellingtol Street Lake Erie 0 Line 0 500 1,000 I nn 1:50,000 March 2015 Proiect # 122511076 Legend Client/Project Q Project Area Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (10Sta ntec Sof Sediment Small l Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Notes Figure No. 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources© Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013. Title Key Plan Legend SBuilding ta ntec Road Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2008. 3. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013. 4. Property Boundary: Kim Husted Surveying Ltd. (1998). Plan 11 R-6760, Project 97-45621, Reference HF 1, February 17, 1998. Tillsonburg, ON. o"C' 2015 Project No 12251 1 076 Client/Project Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada SSRA of Sediment Small Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Figure No. 2 Title Site Plan (3 Stantec Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2008. 3. Property Boundary: Kim Husted Surveying Ltd. (1998). Plan 11 R-6760, Project 97-45621, Reference HF 1, February 17, 1998. Tillsonburg, ON Legend Sampling Location A Sediment Sample, Stantec Q Sediment Sample, Stantec (Background) A Deep Core Sample A Sediment Sample, Terropex ® Surface Water Sample, Stantec Surface Water Sample, Stantec (Background) OProperty Boundary August 2015 Protect No. 122511075 Client/Project Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada SSRA of Sediment Small Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Figure No. 3 Title Sampling Locations SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix B Data Tables September 11, 2015 Data Tables ® Stantec a Table B-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Pg/g SD15-01 SD15-01 COMP SD15-02 SDI 5-02 COMP SD15-03 SD15-03 COMP SD15-04 SD15-05 SD15-06 SD15-07 SD15-08 SD15-09 SD15-10 SD15-11* SD15-12* SD15-13* SD15-14* Sample Date lag/g 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 13 -Mar -15 13 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 Fluoride hg/g - - - - - - - - - - SD15-03 COMP - - - - - - - - - - - - Moisture Content % 31 SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP 17 17 SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP 20 SD15-03 COMP SD15-03 COMP 23 22 21 26 36 22 25 16 17 20 20 18 Sample ID Pg/g SD15-01 - - - SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 - - - SD15-03 1,2,3/SSD215-03 SD15-04 SD15-05 SD15-06 SD15-07 SD15-08 SD15-09 SD15-10 SD15-11 SD15-12 SD15-13 SD15-14 QCSD15-01 Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) lag/g - 1,2/SD15-01 SS2 3,4/SD15-01 SS4 5,6/SD15-01 SS6 - 1 2/SD15-02 SS2 3,4/SD15-02 SS4 5,6/SD15-02 SS6 <0.04 4,5 6,7/SD 15-03 SS7 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Nitrite (as N) lag/g <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Sample Depth S. U. 0-0.1 m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m Sampling Company lag/g STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC Laboratory lag/g MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX Laboratory Work Order mg/kg B545246 B548083 B548083 8548083 B545246 B545246 B548083 B548083 B548083 B545246 8548083 8548083 8548083 8545059 B545246 B545246 B545246 B545246 B545059 8547816 B545059 B547816 B547816 B547816 B547816 Laboratory Sample ID none ZW4605 ZX7701/ZX7617 ZX7702/ZX7618 ZX7703/ZX7619 ZW4602 ZW4603 ZX7698/ZX7614 ZX7699/ZX7615 ZX7700/ZX7616 ZW4601 ZX7695/ZX7612 ZX7696 ZX7697/ZX7613 ZW4017 ZW4608 ZW4607 ZW4604 ZW4606 ZW4018 ZX6291 ZW4019 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6292 ZX6293 Sample Type Units 5.7 1.6 1.5 2.4 Field Duplicate 1.5 1.8 5.8 1.4 2.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 2.7 2.6 5 6.8 3.3 2.5 1.4 2.7 1.8 Field Duplicate General Chemistry Ammonia (as N) Pg/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - <0.005 - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Chloride lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 - 0.1 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Fluoride hg/g - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moisture Content % 31 19 19 15 17 17 20 16 27 20 24 19 11 23 22 21 26 36 22 25 16 17 20 20 18 Nitrate (as N) Pg/g - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) lag/g - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 - - <0.04 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Nitrite (as N) lag/g <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 pH S. U. <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 Sulfate lag/g - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen lag/g 391 82 157 72 103 184 85 267 776 66 510 136 85 218 448 200 502 961 409 310 136 51 60 77 65 Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 12000 - - - 2200 3800 - - - 2000 - - - 4700 4700 4300 10000 14000 13000 4000 5500 3900 4100 2900 3400 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene lag/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Toluene lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.1 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Ethylbenzene lag/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Xylene, m & p- lag/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Xylene, o- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Xylenes, Total lag/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) lag/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX lag/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) lag/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) lag/g <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <10 <10 11 <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <50 <50 54 51 <10 <50 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) lag/g <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <10 <50 <10 <10 <10 <10 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 none YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Metals Aluminum lag/g 7800 1800 2000 3400 2000 2900 1700 2000 7600 1400 2500 1700 2100 1800 3400 3300 6900 9600 4300 2700 1600 1600 1700 1600 1600 Antimony lag/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.21 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Arsenic lag/g 2.4 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 3.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 1.2 2.2 3.4 1.9 1.4 <1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 Barium lag/g 45 8.9 10 20 11 16 7.8 9.6 45 6.9 13 8.0 9.4 9.5 19 19 40 57 28 16 8.5 8.1 8.4 8.2 7.7 Beryllium lag/g 0.38 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.37 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.32 0.45 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Bismuth lag/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Boron lag/g 6.4 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 6.7 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7.3 7.3 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Boron (Available) lag/g 0.27 <0.050 0.090 0.22 0.082 0.12 0.071 0.089 0.39 <0.050 0.12 0.071 0.095 0.18 0.27 0.17 0.24 0.33 0.31 0.16 0.065 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Cadmium lag/g 0.14 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.18 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.13 0.16 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 Calcium lag/g 67000 50000 53000 53000 52000 60000 49000 52000 90000 49000 64000 55000 65000 51000 58000 58000 66000 69000 60000 59000 48000 75000 71000 57000 57000 Chromium (Hexavalent) lag/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 Chromium (Total) lag/g 12 4.1 4.8 6.6 4.3 6.1 5.9 5.3 12 2.6 5.5 4.4 5.4 3.6 6.4 6.7 12 15 7.5 5.0 4 17 6.5 3.5 5.0 Cobalt lag/g 5.7 1.6 1.5 2.4 1.8 2.5 1.5 1.8 5.8 1.4 2.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 2.7 2.6 5 6.8 3.3 2.5 1.4 2.7 1.8 1.5 1.6 Copper lag/g 14 2.0 2.4 5.1 3.2 5.4 1.9 2.8 16 2.2 4.4 2.8 4.7 2.9 6.1 6.1 13 18 8.4 5.5 2.5 2.2 3.8 2.4 2.9 Iron lag/g 15000 5300 5300 7300 5600 7000 7700 6300 16000 3500 6600 5200 5700 4100 7800 8200 14000 18000 9400 6200 4700 27000 8900 4400 6400 Lead lag/g 8.8 2.4 2.6 4.7 2.7 3.8 2.4 2.6 11 2.6 3.7 2.8 3.2 2.3 4 4 7.8 11 7.2 4.4 2.3 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.9 Lithium lag/g 12 2.5 2.7 4.6 3.5 5 2.2 2.7 12 2.9 3.9 2.7 3.4 3 4.7 5.1 10 14 7 3.8 2.9 1.2 1.9 2.3 2.1 Magnesium lag/g 14000 9000 9000 9800 9500 11000 9000 9300 19000 6300 12000 8200 12000 8700 10000 12000 14000 15000 12000 9800 8100 12000 11000 7900 7700 Manganese lag/g 520 160 170 240 190 250 150 180 580 140 240 160 230 150 270 270 470 630 310 240 160 210 180 160 160 Mercury lag/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Molybdenum lag/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Nickel lag/g 12 2.6 2.6 4.5 3.5 4.8 2.4 3.1 12 3.1 4.4 3.2 3.7 2.6 5.2 4.9 10 15 6.5 5.1 2.8 4.2 3.4 3.3 3.3 Phosphorus lag/g 780 450 440 530 430 520 640 510 790 240 590 400 480 400 600 680 750 830 660 450 430 1500 750 360 400 Potassium lag/g 1100 280 320 480 290 430 240 310 1100 230 390 290 370 250 460 510 1000 1400 580 420 240 210 270 280 240 Selenium lag/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Silver lag/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Sodium lag/g 160 58 66 71 81 100 64 68 140 70 90 64 83 86 99 120 150 160 110 80 75 69 69 <50 <50 Strontium lag/g 92 59 65 65 64 76 57 65 120 64 78 69 80 61 72 72 89 98 76 76 58 92 86 74 72 Sulfur lag/g 560 100 120 270 170 <50 100 180 1000 200 250 200 360 120 <500 220 490 690 400 280 97 280 310 220 210 Thallium lag/g 0.075 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.10 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.067 0.11 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Tin lag/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Titanium lag/g 220 - - - 160 170 - - - 94 - - - 150 180 190 210 230 170 140 150 - - 130 160 Tungsten Pg/g - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Uranium lag/g 0.41 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.22 0.27 0.32 0.27 0.49 0.16 0.34 0.25 0.27 0.2 0.29 0.28 0.37 0.44 0.36 0.26 0.23 0.58 0.35 0.22 0.23 Vanadium lag/g 19 9.1 9.1 11 9.5 11 16 11 20 5.2 11 8.6 8.2 6.7 11 13 19 23 13 8.4 8.4 63 18 6.4 12 Zinc lag/g 48 14 16 23 15 23 13 15 48 13 20 13 15 14 24 29 44 62 30 23 13 33 19 15 9.9 Zirconium lag/g See notes on last page Sta ntec 122511075 Page 1 of 4 Table B-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sample Depth Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Uni Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons SD15-01 11 -Mar -15 SD15-01 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4605 SD15-02 SD15-01 COMP 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP 1,2/SD15-01 SS2 3,4/SD15-01 SS4 5,6/SD15-01 SS6 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX B548083 B548083 B548083 ZX7701/ZX7617 ZX7702/ZX7618 ZX7703/ZX7619 SD15-02 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX B545246 B545246 ZW4602 ZW4603 STANTEC Field Duplicate SD15-03 9 -Mar -15 SD 15-03 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4601 SD15-02 COMP 13 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP 1,2/SD15-02 SS2 3,4/SD15-02 SS4 5,6/SD15-02 SS6 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX B548083 B548083 B548083 ZX7698/ZX7614 ZX7699/ZX7615 ZX7700/ZX7616 SD15-03 9 -Mar -15 SD 15-03 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4601 SD15-04 12 -Mar -15 SD15-04 0 - 0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545059 ZW4017 SD15-05 11 -Mar -15 SD15-05 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4608 SD15-06 11 -Mar -15 SD15-06 0 - 0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4607 SD15-07 10 -Mar -15 SD15-07 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4604 SD15-08 11 -Mar -15 SD15-08 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4606 SD15-09 12 -Mar -15 SD15-09 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545059 ZW4018 SD15-10 16 -Mar -15 SD15-10 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B547816 ZX6291 SD15-11* 12 -Mar -15 SD15-11 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545059 ZW4019 SD15-12* 13 -Mar -15 SD15-12 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B547816 ZX6288 SD15-13* SD15-03 COMP 13 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 SDI 5-03 COMP OCSD15-01 0- 0.1 m 0- 0.1 m SD15-03 COMP SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3/SD15-03 STANTEC MAXX MAXX 4,5 6,7/SD 15-03 SS7 SS2 B547816 ZX6289 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX B548083 B548083 B548083 ZX7695/ZX7612 ZX7696 ZX7697/ZX7613 SD15-04 12 -Mar -15 SD15-04 0 - 0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545059 ZW4017 SD15-05 11 -Mar -15 SD15-05 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4608 SD15-06 11 -Mar -15 SD15-06 0 - 0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4607 SD15-07 10 -Mar -15 SD15-07 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4604 SD15-08 11 -Mar -15 SD15-08 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545246 ZW4606 SD15-09 12 -Mar -15 SD15-09 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545059 ZW4018 SD15-10 16 -Mar -15 SD15-10 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B547816 ZX6291 SD15-11* 12 -Mar -15 SD15-11 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B545059 ZW4019 SD15-12* 13 -Mar -15 SD15-12 0-0.1 m STANTEC MAXX B547816 ZX6288 SD15-13* SD15-14* 13 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 SD15-13 SD15-14 OCSD15-01 0- 0.1 m 0- 0.1 m 0- 0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX B547816 B547816 B547816 ZX6289 ZX6292 ZX6293 <0.0050 <0.0050 Field Duplicate Acenaphthene Pg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Acenaphthylene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0083 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Anthracene Pg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0068 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0092 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.01 <0.0050 0.0065 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.017 <0.0050 0.0065 0.037 <0.0050 0.012 0.0062 <0.0050 0.014 0.006 <0.0050 0.0075 0.014 <0.0050 0.0078 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)pyrene Ng/g 0.012 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.015 <0.0050 0.0055 0.042 <0.0050 0.012 0.0057 <0.0050 0.012 0.0054 <0.0050 0.0081 0.016 0.0052 0.0067 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo (b/j)fIuoranthene ug/g 0.021 <0.0050 0.0092 0.0068 <0.0050 0.02 <0.0050 0.0082 0.067 <0.0050 0.019 0.010 0.0060 0.014 0.009 0.0059 0.015 0.027 0.0081 0.011 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g 0.0096 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0085 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.033 <0.0050 0.0079 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0081 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0075 0.014 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(k)fluoranthene Pg/g 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0074 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.023 <0.0050 0.0057 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0058 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Chrysene Ng/g 0.011 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.016 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.041 <0.0050 0.012 0.0077 <0.0050 0.013 0.0054 <0.0050 0.0081 0.014 0.0058 0.0084 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Dibenzo (a,h)anthracene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.029 <0.0050 0.016 0.011 0.0062 0.055 <0.0050 0.015 0.095 <0.0050 0.032 0.020 0.012 0.04 0.014 0.0081 0.019 0.033 0.013 0.022 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0059 0.0096 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Pg/g 0.009 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0091 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.037 <0.0050 0.0091 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0081 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0069 0.013 0.0058 0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Methylnaphthalene (Total) Pg/g - <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 - - <0.0071 <0.0071 0.016 - <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 - <0.0071 - - - - <0.0071 - <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 Methylnaphthalene, 1- Pg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0059 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Methylnaphthalene, 2- ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0066 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Naphthalene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Phenanthrene Pg/g 0.011 <0.0050 0.0082 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.026 <0.0050 0.0055 0.048 <0.0050 0.019 0.011 0.0080 0.033 0.006 <0.0050 0.0075 0.012 0.0052 0.016 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0064 Pyrene ug/g 0.022 <0.0050 0.013 0.0084 0.005 0.041 <0.0050 0.011 0.076 <0.0050 0.025 0.017 0.010 0.031 0.011 0.0065 0.015 0.028 0.01 0.018 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0065 0.0096 Total PAH Pg/g I - - <0.0020 - - - I - - - - - <0.0020 - - - - - - - - - - - <0.0020 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1221 Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1232 Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1242 Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1248 Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1260 Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1262 Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1268 Pg/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Ng/g <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Aldrin + Dieldrin Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, alpha- Pg/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, beta- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, delta- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane (Total) Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane, alpha- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane, gamma- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD, o,p'- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0049 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD (p,p'-DDD) Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.015 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 , o,p - N9 9 < 0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE (p,p'-DDE) Ng/g 0.0065 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0028 0.013 <0.0020 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 0.0033 0.0029 0.0022 0.0037 0.0092 0.0058 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- ug/g 0.0065 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0028 0.013 <0.0020 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 0.0033 0.0029 0.0022 0.0037 0.0092 0.0058 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT (p,p'-DDT) Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0044 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0044 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT + Metabolites Ng/g 0.0065 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0028 0.035 <0.0020 0.0053 0.0064 0.0027 0.0033 0.0029 0.0022 0.0037 0.014 0.0058 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT Total Pg/g - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dieldrin ug/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan Pg/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan I Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan 11 Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan Sulfate ug/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Aldehyde Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Ketone Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor Pg/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor Epoxide ug/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Hexachlorobenzene Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) Ng/g <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Hexachloroethane Pg/g <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Methoxychlor(4,4'-Methoxychlor) Ng/g <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Mirex Ng/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Toxaphene (Camphechlor) Ng/g <0.12 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.12 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 See notes on iasT page ® Stantec 122511075 Page 2 of 4 Table B-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location SD15-15* SED1-1 SED1-3 SED2-1 SED2-3 SED3-1 SED3-2 SED4-1 SED5-1* SED6-1 SED7-1* SED8-1* SED9-1 Sample Date 16 -Mar -15 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 Sample ID SD15-15 SED1-1 SED10-1 SED1-3 SED2-1 SED2-3 SED3-1 SED3-2 SED4-1 SED5-1 SED6-1 SED7-1 SED8-1 SED9-1 Sample Depth 0-0.1 m 0-1.5m 0-1.5m 3-4.5m 0-0.9m 2.4-3.9m 0-0.9m 0.9-2.3m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m Sampling Company STANTEC TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX Laboratory MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX Laboratory Work Order B547816 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Laboratory Sample ID ZX6294 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Sample Type Units Field Duplicate 7.71 7.69 7.7 7.72 7.41 Sulfate ug/g - <20 <20 <20 <20 General Chemistry Ammonia (as N) Pg/g - <25 <25 252 68 197 <25 184 59 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 Chloride Ng/g - <20 <20 23 <20 <20 21 <20 30 <20 <20 <20 <20 35 Fluoride Pg/g - <5 <5 <5 <5 5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 Moisture Content % 17 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nitrate (as N) Pg/g - <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 4 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) Pg/g <0.04 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 4 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 Nitrite (as N) Ng/g <10 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 pH S. U. <10 7.12 7.12 7.45 7.09 7.47 7.25 7.75 7.13 7.71 7.69 7.7 7.72 7.41 Sulfate ug/g - <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 71 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Pg/g 74 321 459 1490 500 1010 217 177 784 127 83 40 48 802 Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 2500 7800 6900 14000 6400 12000 4300 9500 12000 5100 3100 8200 7600 14000 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Toluene Ng/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Ethylbenzene Pg/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Xylene, m & p- Pg/g <0.04 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Xylene, o- Ng/g <0.02 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Xylenes, Total Pg/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) Ng/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX Pg/g <10 - - - - - - - - - - - - - PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) Pg/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <20 <10 19 <10 <10 <10 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) Ng/g <10 180 83 69 19 59 <10 42 45 18 53 14 19 24 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) Pg/g <10 40 12 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <20 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 none YES - 13 - 12 - 5 8.1 - 2.4 - 3.5 11 Metals Aluminum Pg/g 2000 2600 2600 7600 3000 7100 1700 2500 4200 1300 1300 1200 1200 6700 Antimony Pg/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Arsenic Ng/g 1.3 1.5 1.6 3.5 1.9 3.6 1.2 1.9 2 1.3 1.9 1.7 1.7 3.1 Barium Pg/g 10 18 17 55 20 53 11 15 33 7.9 6.2 5.7 6.7 54 Beryllium Ng/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.39 <0.20 0.38 <0.20 <0.20 0.25 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.39 Bismuth Pg/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Boron Pg/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Boron (Available) Ng/g <0.050 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Cadmium Pg/g <O.10 <O.10 0.1 0.2 <0.10 0.17 <0.10 <O.10 0.1 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 0.17 Calcium Ng/g 70000 61000 63000 68000 68000 77000 57000 85000 58000 59000 52000 81000 82000 65000 Chromium (Hexavalent) Pg/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 Chromium (Total) Pg/g 4.4 6 5.7 13 6 12 4.7 5 8.1 3.3 2.4 8.2 3.5 11 Cobalt Ng/g 2.0 2.5 2.5 5.9 3.1 6.2 1.7 2.7 3.6 1.6 1.6 1.9 1.6 5.3 Copper Pg/g 4.8 5.9 5.9 16 8.5 17 3.8 11 9.6 3 3.2 2.9 3.6 15 Iron Ng/g 5800 7500 7500 16000 8500 16000 5900 7800 10000 5000 3700 13000 4500 15000 Lead Pg/g 3.5 4.2 4.3 14 5.3 12 2.8 4.2 6 3 3.2 3.3 3.1 9 Lithium Pg/g 3.1 Magnesium Ng/g 12000 13000 13000 14000 14000 15000 11000 19000 11000 9500 5900 14000 14000 12000 Manganese Pg/g 230 270 290 540 360 590 210 420 390 160 150 200 210 560 Mercury Ng/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Molybdenum Pg/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Nickel Pg/g 4.0 4.9 5 12 6.3 13 3.4 5.6 7.8 3.4 3.7 3.2 3.4 12 Phosphorus Ng/g 480 750 770 960 620 860 640 670 670 550 190 1600 850 810 Potassium Pg/g 340 290 300 710 360 750 210 330 470 <200 <200 <200 <200 750 Selenium Ng/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Silver Pg/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Sodium Pg/g 70 100 <100 <100 110 110 <100 110 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 120 Strontium Pg/g 89 73 75 93 83 110 68 110 78 74 67 95 96 92 Sulfur Pg/g 370 - - - - - - - - - - - - - Thallium Ng/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.064 <0.050 0.072 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.068 Tin Pg/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Titanium Pg/g 150 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 268 Tungsten Ng/g - n n <1 n <1 n <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 Uranium Pg/g 0.30 0.24 0.27 0.44 0.28 0.42 0.24 0.32 0.26 0.23 0.18 0.49 0.32 0.35 Vanadium Ng/g 9.2 11 11 19 11 18 9.1 9 13 7.4 <5.0 28 6.8 17 Zinc Pg/g 17 27 25 56 29 52 16 25 36 14 11 34 19 51 Zirconium Pg/g - - 5 - 5 2 3 1 1 1 <1 4 See notes on last page Sta ntec 122511075 Page 3 of 4 Table B-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location SD15-15* SED1-1 SED1-3 SED2-1 SED2-3 SED3-1 SED3-2 SED4-1 SED5-1* SED6-1 SED7-1* SED8-1* SED9-1 Sample Date 16 -Mar -15 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 5 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 6 -Dec -12 Sample ID SD15-15 SED1-1 SED10-1 SED1-3 SED2-1 SED2-3 SED3-1 SED3-2 SED4-1 SED5-1 SED6-1 SED7-1 SED8-1 SED9-1 Sample Depth 0-0.1 m 0-1.5m 0-1.5m 3-4.5m 0-0.9m 2.4-3.9m 0-0.9m 0.9-2.3m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m Sampling Company STANTEC TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX TERRAPEX Laboratory MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX Laboratory Work Order 8547816 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Laboratory Sample ID ZX6294 UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN UNKNOWN Sample Type Units Field Duplicate <0.0050 0.0054 0.0098 0.0059 0.017 <0.0050 0.0059 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene Pg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Acenaphthylene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.008 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Anthracene µg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0068 <0.0050 0.013 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0076 0.0084 0.025 0.01 0.045 0.0066 0.012 0.012 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0071 Benzo(a)pyrene Ng/g <0.0050 0.0079 0.0096 0.02 0.0098 0.034 0.0067 0.01 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0063 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.013 0.016 0.026 0.017 0.045 0.011 0.015 0.016 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.011 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0066 0.012 0.0061 0.021 <0.0050 0.0075 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0059 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0054 0.0098 0.0059 0.017 <0.0050 0.0059 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 0.011 0.016 0.021 0.02 0.043 0.0084 0.016 0.014 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0095 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.017 0.021 0.055 0.022 0.1 0.017 0.036 0.031 0.0099 0.0062 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.018 Fluorene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0055 <0.0050 0.0093 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene µg/g <0.0050 0.0058 0.0073 0.014 0.0069 0.025 <0.0050 0.0078 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.006 Methylnaphthalene (Total) ug/g <0.0071 0.0052 <0.0050 0.0051 0.0065 0.0176 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0052 Methylnaphthalene, 1- Ng/g <0.0050 0.0052 <0.0050 0.0051 0.0065 0.011 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0052 Methylnaphthalene, 2- ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0066 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Naphthalene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Phenanthrene µg/g <0.0050 0.0068 0.011 0.034 0.0094 0.066 0.009 0.022 0.013 0.0063 0.0076 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0073 Pyrene ug/g <0.0050 0.015 0.017 0.048 0.018 0.086 0.014 0.029 0.026 0.0081 0.0072 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.015 Total PAH Ng/g - 0.085 0.1183 0.2722 0.1161 0.5129 0.0727 0.1322 0.086 0.0162 0.0138 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0861 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1221 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1232 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1242 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 - Aroclor 1248 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 - Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 - Aroclor 1260 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 - Aroclor 1262 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 - Aroclor 1268 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 - <0.015 - <0.015 <0.015 Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Aldrin + Dieldrin Ng/g <0.0020 BHC, alpha- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, beta- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, delta- ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.002 <0.0020 0.002 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane, alpha- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane, gamma- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.002 <0.0020 0.002 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD, o,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 0.003 0.003 0.007 <0.0020 0.008 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD (p,p'-DDD) Pg/g <0.0020 0.009 0.008 0.021 <0.0020 0.022 0.004 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- ug/g <0.0020 0.012 0.011 0.028 <0.0020 0.03 0.004 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE, o,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE (p,p'-DDE) Ng/g <0.0020 0.019 0.016 0.033 0.004 0.035 0.005 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 0.019 0.016 0.033 0.004 0.035 0.005 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT (p,p'-DDT) ug/g <0.0020 0.003 0.002 0.006 <0.0020 0.005 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 0.003 0.002 0.006 <0.0020 0.005 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT + Metabolites Ng/g <0.0020 0.034 0.029 0.067 0.004 0.07 0.009 <0.0020 - <0.0030 - <0.0030 <0.0030 DDT Total Ng/g - 0.034 0.029 0.067 0.004 0.07 0.009 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Dieldrin Pg/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan I Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan II Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan Sulfate Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Pg/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Endrin Ketone Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Heptachlor Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Heptachlor Epoxide Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Ng/g <0.0050 Hexachloroethane Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) ug/g <0.0050 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Mirex Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 - <0.0020 - <0.0020 <0.0020 - Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 - <0.0050 - <0.0050 <0.0050 - Toxaphene (Camphechlor) Pg/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 - <0.080 - <0.080 <0.080 - ® Stantec Notes: 15.2 Concentration was detected. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reportable detection limit. - Parameter not analyzed / not available. MI Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. * Background samples 122511075 Page 4 of 4 Table B-2 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order ( Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Units General Chemistry SWI. 11 -Mar -15 SW15-01 STANTEC MAXX B545248/ B521988 ZW4617/ LX0924 i-01 12 -Mar -15 QC -SW -15-01 STANTEC MAXX B545248/ B521988 ZW4615/ LX0922 Field Duplicate SW15-02 10 -Mar -15 SW15-02 STANTEC MAXX B545248/ B521988 ZW4614/ LX0921 SW15-03 9 -Mar -15 SW15-03 STANTEC MAXX B545248/ B521988 ZW4613/ LX0920 SW15-04 12 -Mar -15 SW15-04 STANTEC MAXX B545209/ B521998 ZW4483/ LX0946 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW15-07 SW15-08 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW15-07 SW15-08 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX B545209/ B545209/ B545248/ B545248/ B521998 B521998 B521988 B521988 ZW4482/ ZW4481/ ZW4616/ ZW4618/ LX0945 LX0944 LX0923 LX0925 SW15-09 SW15-10 SW15-11* SW15-12* SW15-13* SW15-14* SW15-15* 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 I 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 SW15-09 SW15-10 SW15-11 SW15-12 SW15-13 SW15-14 SW15-15 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX <0.20 6526959/ B526959/ B526959/ N B526959/ B526959/ 6545209/ 6545209/ <0.20 0.35 0.23 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 6596463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ 6521998 8521998 I 0.54 0.43 0.35 0.58 0.5 0.65 B543306 B543306 B543306 B543306 B543306 <0.10 AW2719/ AW2720/ AW2721/ AW2722/ AW2723/ ZW4485/ ZW4484/ <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 AHZ739/ AHZ740/ AHZ741/ AHZ742/ AHZ743/ LX0948 LX0947 I <0.20 <0.20 II <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 MH7156 MH7157 MH7158 MH7159 MH7160 Field Blank Trip Blank 12 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX B545209/ B545209/ B521998 B521998 ZW4486/ ZW4487/ LX0949 LX0950 Field Blank Trip Blank Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 240 120 120 170 160 <0.20 <0.20 pH S.U. lag/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 8.24 8.08 8.09 8.15 8.22 <0.20 0.35 0.23 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.34 0.58 0.37 0.43 0.62 0.5 0.54 0.43 0.35 0.58 0.5 0.65 <0.50 <0.50 1.4 0.37 0.13 <0.10 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene lag/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Toluene lag/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.53 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.35 0.23 <0.20 <0.20 Ethylbenzene lag/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 ` <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Xylene, m & p- lag/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.24 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 II <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Xylene, o- lag/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.20 <0.40 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.40 <0.40 Xylenes, Total lag/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.24 <0.40 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.40 <0.40 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) lag/L <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX lag/L <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 PHC F2(>C10-C16range) lag/L <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 PHC F3(>C16-C34range) lag/L <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) lag/L <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 lag/L YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Metals Aluminum lag/L 173 473 149 139 398 157 129 143 152 570 710 411 296 415 792 703 <3.0 <3.0 Antimony lag/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Arsenic lag/L 0.42 0.49 0.38 0.43 0.51 0.47 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.53 0.80 0.51 0.62 0.67 jj 0.90 0.69 <0.10 <0.10 Barium lag/L 43.4 49.6 44.0 42.6 48.7 44.4 46.0 45.2 47.5 49.3 45.3 44.2 26.2 27.5 I 37.0 33.5 <1.0 <1.0 Beryllium lag/L <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 I <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 Bismuth lag/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Boron lag/L <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 Cadmium lag/L <0.010 0.015 <0.010 0.012 0.016 0.011 0.010 <0.010 0.012 0.011 0.010 0.014 0.012 0.011 0.027 0.012 <0.010 <0.010 Calcium mg/L 86.8 86.8 90.5 87.3 88.0 90.9 89.2 90.0 89.4 88.1 75.0 84.4 35.9 36.0 50.1 44.6 <0.050 <0.050 Chromium (Hexavalent) lag/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Chromium (Total) lag/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 P <1.0 PPP <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Cobalt lag/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Copper lag/L 1.23 2.09 1.30 1.77 1.62 0.99 1.34 1.12 1.47 1.66 1.85 2.06 2.07 1.63 2.48 2.44 <0.50 <0.50 Iron lag/L 360 694 304 325 663 303 298 308 323 762 668 637 304 378 968 863 <10 <10 Lead lag/L 0.25 0.57 <0.20 0.24 0.50 0.31 0.26 <0.20 0.27 0.57 0.56 0.49 0.24 0.34 0.80 0.67 <0.20 <0.20 Lithium lag/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Magnesium mg/L 16.4 16.9 16.4 16.9 16.3 18.0 17.3 16.8 17.4 16.6 14.5 16.0 8.79 9.23 11.1 9.63 <0.050 <0.050 Manganese lag/L 44.2 64.3 43.2 47.4 61.6 45.1 45.3 43.9 44.3 62.4 72.4 58.5 9.8 9.9 70.4 46.8 <1.0 <1.0 Mercury lag/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.010 <0.01 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.01 <0.01 Molybdenum lag/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.1 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Nickel lag/L <1.0 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 1.4 1.6 <1.0 1.2 1.6 1.5 <1.0 <1.0 Phosphorus lag/L 35 46 25 48 44 21 20 25 24 45 - 40 - - - - <10 <10 Potassium mg/L 2.39 2.72 2.49 2.35 2.54 2.57 2.44 2.50 2.45 2.77 2.37 2.53 1.58 1.77 2.03 1.77 <0.050 <0.050 Selenium lag/L 0.16 0.15 <O.10 0.22 0.15 0.21 0.16 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.15 <0.10 0.16 0.17 0.21 0.16 <0.10 <0.10 Silicon lag/L 4390 4860 4670 4560 4950 4870 4520 4800 4560 5140 3400 4850 838 1110 1860 1660 <100 <100 Silver lag/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 0.031 <0.020 Sodium mg/L 40.3 57.8 25.8 24.9 58.7 43.2 47.8 28.6 51.6 39.9 14.6 37.4 9.06 9.44 11.2 9.42 <0.050 <0.050 Strontium lag/L 309 314 319 307 324 329 320 313 322 304 280 298 166 171 212 187 <1.0 <1.0 Sulfur mg/L 11.4 12.6 9.2 11.5 9.0 9.7 14.6 11.5 14.3 11.2 10.4 11.6 8.5 4.6 N 7.8 8.5 <3.0 <3.0 Thallium lag/L <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 ^ <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Tin lag/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Titanium lag/L 22.5 23.3 <5.0 5.2 11.3 5.6 <5.0 6.1 5.7 42.7 26.2 15.0 7.6 26.2 20.1 17.6 <5.0 <5.0 Uranium lag/L 0.76 0.78 0.78 0.80 0.76 0.84 0.79 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.73 0.73 0.40 0.41 0.54 0.48 <0.10 <0.10 Vanadium lag/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Zinc lag/L 27.9 5.1 <5.0 46.2 <5.0 30.1 <5.0 18.5 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 (1) 5.7 101 5.1 9.3 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Zirconium lag/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1221 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1232 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1242 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1248 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1254 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1260 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1262 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1268 lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) lag/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 See notes on last page ® Stantec 122511075 Page 1 of 2 Table B-2 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location fag/L SW15-01 <0.010 SW15-02 SW15-03 SW15-04 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW15-07 SW15-08 SW15-09 SW15-10 SW15-11* SW15-12* SW15-13* SW15-14* SW15-15* Field Blank Trip Blank Sample Date Acenaphthylene 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 I 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 12 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 Sample ID <0.010 SW15-01 QC -SW -15-01 SW15-02 SW15-03 SW15-04 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW15-07 SW15-08 SW15-09 SW15-10 SW15-11 SW15-12 SW15-13 SW15-14 SW15-15 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK Sampling Company <0.010 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC Laboratory <0.010 MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX I MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX <0.010 <0.010 ^ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo (b/j)fIuoranthene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6526959/ B526959/ B526959/ B526959/ B526959/ <0.010 0.02 <0.010 <0.010 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545209/ 6545209/ 6545209/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545209/ 6545209/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6545209/ 6545209/ Laboratory Work Order <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(k)fluoranthene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6521988 6521988 6521988 6521988 6521998 6521998 6521998 6521988 6521988 6521998 6521998 I <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6521998 6521998 <0.010 <0.010 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene fag/L B543306 B543306 B543306 B543306 6543306 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Fluoranthene AW2719/ AW2720/ AW2721/ AW2722/ AW2723/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 ZW4617/ ZW4615/ ZW4614/ ZW4613/ ZW4483/ ZW4482/ ZW4481/ ZW4616/ ZW4618/ ZW4485/ ZW4484/ fag/L <0.010 <0.010 ZW4486/ ZW4487/ Laboratory Sample ID <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 AHZ739/ AHZ740/ AHZ741/ AHZ742/ AHZ743/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 LX0924 LX0922 LX0921 LX0920 LX0946 LX0945 LX0944 LX0923 LX0925 LX0948 LX0947 I <0.010 Methylnaphthalene, 1- fag/L LX0949 LX0950 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 MH7156 MH7157 MH7158 MH7159 MH7160 fag/L <0.010 Sample Type Units <0.010 Field Duplicate <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.011 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Field Blank Trip Blank Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Acenaphthylene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 I <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Anthracene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(a)anthracene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 ` <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(a)pyrene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.015 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 ^ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo (b/j)fIuoranthene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.02 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(k)fluoranthene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Chrysene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Fluoranthene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Fluorene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 1ndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Methylnaphthalene, 1- fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Methylnaphthalene, 2 fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.011 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Naphthalene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.015 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 N <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Phenanthrene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Pyrene fag/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 BHC, alpha- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 BHC, beta- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 BHC, delta- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Chlordane (Total) fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Chlordane, alpha- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Chlordane, gamma- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 DDD, o,p'- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDD (p,p'-DDD) fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - ` - - <0.005 <0.005 DDE, o,p- pg/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 ^ <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDE (p,p'-DDE) fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - ! - - <0.005 <0.005 DDT, o,p'- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDT (p,p'-DDT) fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDT, o,p'-+ DDT, p,p'- fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 DDT+ Metabolites ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Dieldrin fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan I fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan 11 fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan Sulfate fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Endrin fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Endrin Aldehyde fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endrin Ketone fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Heptachlor fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Heptachlor Epoxide fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Hexachlorobenzene fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) fag/L <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.004 <0.009 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 <0.009 <0.009 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 Hexachloroethane fag/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.003 <0.01 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.01 <0.01 Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) fag/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) fag/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.003 <0.01 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.01 <0.01 Mirex fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Octachlorostyrene fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Oxychlordane fag/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Toxaphene ug/L <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - <0.2 - - <0.2 <0.2 See notes on last page �+ Stantec N otes: 15.2 Concentration was detected. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reporting limit. - Parameter not analyzed / not available. MF Matrix Spike outside acceptance criteria (10% of analytes failure allowed). MI Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. * Background samples 122511075 Page 2 of 2 Table B-3 Summary of Fish Tissue Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Name Sample Date Sample ID Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Fish Species Fat (gravimetric) Moisture Metals REFI-COMP1* 19 -May -15 REF]-COMP1 STANTEC MAXX AIS104 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS105 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMP3* 19 -May -15 REF] -COMP3 STANTEC MAXX AIS106 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner REF1-COMP4* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP4 STANTEC MAXX AIS107 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMPS* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP5 STANTEC MAXX AIS108 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 REF -I -WB -OI* MAXX 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 Body EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 REF -I -WB -01 79.6 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC <0.3 MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX 0.5 AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 AIS115 AIS116 AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 AIS 114 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Composite Composite Composite Composite Composite <0.05 <0.05 Fillet Filler Fillet Fillet Fillet <0.05 <0.05 Bismuth (Bi) lag/g <0.05 Fillet <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald <0.5 Units White Sucker White Sucker Common Carp Common Carp Common Carp <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 White Bass <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner 0.01 0.04 0.06 1.0 0.40 3.5 9.5 2.4 2.2 2.6 2.8 3.3 2.9 3.3 g/ l OOg 84.2 82.3 76.0 70.3 79.0 80.0 79.9 77.6 77.1 78.1 74.6 REFI-COMP1* 19 -May -15 REF]-COMP1 STANTEC MAXX AIS104 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS105 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMP3* 19 -May -15 REF] -COMP3 STANTEC MAXX AIS106 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner REF1-COMP4* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP4 STANTEC MAXX AIS107 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMPS* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP5 STANTEC MAXX AIS108 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF I-COMP6* REF2-YP-0I* REF2-COMP1* 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 1.8 78.8 2.0 80.1 1.6 77.2 1.2 81.3 1.9 77.9 REF I-COMP6* REF2-YP-0I* REF2-COMP1* 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP6 REF2-YP-0I REFIYP-01 REF2-COMP1 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX AIS109 AIS112 AIS113 AIS110 Composite Small <0.1 Composite Small <0.1 Fillet Fillet (Duplicate) Antimony (Sb) Body <0.05 Body Rainbow Smelt Yellow Perch Yellow Perch Spottail Shiner <0.05 2.5 0.10 0.30 1.3 77.2 79.6 79.9 74.5 REF2-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REF2-COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS111 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner 2.3 76.1 Arsenic (As) lag/g <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 Antimony (Sb) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Barium (Ba) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 2.2 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.6 <0.3 0.5 0.5 1.2 0.6 1.1 2.0 <0.3 <0.3 2.6 1.6 Beryllium (Be) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Bismuth (Bi) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Boron (B) lag/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Cadmium (Cd) lag/g <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.06 <0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.03 Calcium (Ca) lag/g 400 130 69 78 76 9500 6400 8200 8200 7700 920 5900 4700 4700 4400 6000 12000 380 1000 8500 9300 Chromium (Cr) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 Cobalt (Co) lag/g <0.005 0.009 0.012 0.009 0.011 0.052 0.028 0.032 0.036 0.041 <0.005 0.005 0.007 0.020 0.007 0.014 0.012 <0.005 <0.005 0.037 0.028 Copper (Cu) lag/g <0.5 0.5 1.7 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.6 <0.5 0.6 0.8 <0.5 0.7 0.7 <0.5 0.6 0.8 0.6 Iron (Fe) lag/g 6 9 29 16 19 140 60 76 83 110 5 10 12 25 16 20 15 4 4 100 37 Lead (Pb) lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.07 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.05 <0.03 <0.03 0.11 0.04 Magnesium (Mg) lag/g 230 260 240 250 240 450 350 410 400 420 290 290 280 310 260 340 400 290 300 370 370 Manganese (Mn) lag/g 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 7.8 4.2 5.4 5.6 5.9 0.4 1.9 1.7 2.0 1.5 2.1 2.6 <0.3 0.7 6.7 2.9 Mercury (Hg) lag/g 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.17 0.16 0.022 0.027 0.036 0.035 0.042 0.10 0.049 0.034 0.038 0.055 0.030 0.045 0.040 0.058 0.054 0.030 Molybdenum (Mo) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Nickel (Ni) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.10 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 Phosphorus (P) lag/g 2100 2400 2300 2200 2300 6300 5200 6000 5900 5800 2500 4800 4200 4100 3800 4900 7600 2400 2900 4900 6800 Potassium (K) lag/g 3500 4700 3800 3700 3900 2900 3000 3100 3000 3000 3800 3100 3100 3000 2800 2800 2700 4200 4200 3000 2900 Selenium (Se) lag/g 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 Silver (Ag) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Sodium (Na) lag/g 570 350 440 330 430 670 640 740 740 750 370 750 710 760 540 520 690 300 320 840 730 Strontium (Sr) lag/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 15 11 13 14 12 1.0 6.4 5.1 6.7 5.1 7.9 14 <0.5 0.6 13 12 Thallium (TI) lag/g <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.024 0.006 0.008 0.004 0.005 0.003 0.004 0.010 0.015 0.003 0.004 Tin (Sn) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 Titanium (Ti) lag/g 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 7.5 4.8 5.9 6.2 6.2 2.1 3.9 3.6 3.8 3.0 4.3 6.3 2.0 2.4 4.9 5.4 Uranium (U) lag/g 0.007 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.007 0.006 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.009 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.007 Vanadium (V) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 Zinc (Zn) lag/g 4 3 16 13 8 59 55 bl 65 67 5 20 26 23 28 23 24 6 7 25 27 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1221 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1232 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1242 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1248 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1254 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.04 <0.03 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.06 <0.03 <0.03 0.08 0.04 Aroclor 1260 lag/g <0.03 0.04 0.31 0.29 0.21 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.10 <0.03 <0.03 0.11 0.05 Aroclor 1262 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1268 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) lag/g I <0.03 1 0.04 1 0.45 1 0.50 1 0.30 1 0.08 1 0.14 1 0.18 1 0.11 1 0.14 1 0.09 1 0.08 1 <0.05 1 0.16 1 0.13 1 0.12 1 0.2 1 <0.03 1 <0.03 1 0.19 1 0.09 Stantec 122511075 Page 1 of 2 Table B-3 Summary of Fish Tissue Analytical Results DFO Port Burwell Sediment Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Name Sample Date Sample ID Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Fish Species Organochlorine Pesticides Units EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 AIS115 AIS116 AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Composite Composite Composite Composite Composite Fillet Filler Fillet Fillet Fillet <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body <0.02 <0.02 delta -BHC lag/g <0.02 Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald White Sucker White Sucker Common Carp Common Carp Common Carp <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner <0.02 REF -I -WB -OI* 19 -May -15 REF -I -WB -01 STANTEC MAXX AIS 114 Fillet White Bass REFI-COMP1* 19 -May -15 REF]-COMP1 STANTEC MAXX AIS104 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS105 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP3* 19 -May -15 REF] -COMP3 STANTEC MAXX AIS106 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner REFI-COMP4* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP4 STANTEC MAXX AIS107 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI -COMPS* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP5 STANTEC MAXX AIS108 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP6* REF2-YP-0I * REF2-COMP1 * REF2-COMP2* 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 REFI-COMP6 REF2-YP-0I REFIYP-01 REF2-COMP1 REF2-COMP2 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX AIS109 AIS112 AIS113 AIS110 AIS111 Composite Small <0.02 Composite Small Composite Small <0.02 Fillet Fillet (Duplicate) <0.02 <0.02 Body <0.02 Body Body Rainbow Smelt Yellow Perch Yellow Perch Spottail Shiner Spottail Shiner Aldrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Aldrin + Dieldrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 alpha -BHC lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 beta -BHC lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 delta -BHC lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Chlordane (Total) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 a -Chlordane lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 g -Chlordane lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDD, o,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDD (p,p'-DDD) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDD, o,p'-+ DDD, p,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDE, o,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDE (p,p'-DDE) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.09 0.06 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 DDE, o,p'-+ DDE, p,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.09 0.06 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 DDT, o,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDT (p,p'-DDT) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDT+ Metabolites lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.12 0.06 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 Dieldrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Endosulfan I (alpha) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Endosulfan 11 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Endosulfan sulfate lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 Endosulfan (Total) lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Endrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Endrin aldehyde lag/g <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Heptachlor lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Heptachlor epoxide lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Hexachlorobenzene lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Lindane lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Methoxychlor lag/g <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.1 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 Mirex lag/g <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Octachlorostyrene lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Toxaphene lag/g I <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <2 <1 (1) 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 Notes: 15.2 Concentration was detected. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reportable detection limit. - Parameter not analyzed / not available. MI Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. * Background samples Stantec 122511075 Page 2 of 2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix C Human Health Screening September 11, 2015 Human Health Screening ® Stantec C.1 Table C-1 Human Health Screening of Sediment Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sediment Core Background Federal MOECC Other Federal Number of Number of Samples Samples Parameter Maximum Site Maximum Concentration Concentration k Site Sediment Human Health Concentration 1 Guideline a Human Health Jurisdiction Ecological Site Samples Guideline b Guideline Guideline e (including Non -Detect Exceeding Guideline41PSediment Samples Federal Exceeding Carried MOECC Forward? (mg/kg) (mg/kg) Chemistry (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) duplicates) .- Chloride 35 - <20 NG 52,000 - NG 10 6 0 0 No Fluoride 5 - <5 NG NG 9,400 ` NG 10 9 0 NA No pH 7.09-7.75 - 7.70-7.72 6-8 5-9 - NG 10 0 0 0 No Sulfate * 71 - <20 NG NG NGR d NG 10 9 0 NA No Petroleum Hydrocarbons + BTEX Benzene <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.03 0.92 - 1.24 f 30 29 0 0 No Toluene 0.1 <0.02 <0.02 0.37 6.4 - 1.40 f 30 26 0 0 No Ethylbenzene <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.082 1.1 - 1.16 f 30 29 0 0 No Xylene, m & p <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 NG NG 480c NG 20 19 NA NA N -See Note Xylene, o <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 NG NG 480c NG 20 19 NA NA N -See Note Xylenes, Total <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 11 120 - 1.28 f 30 29 0 0 No PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) <10 <10 <10 240 °' 4,100 - 15.2 f 30 29 0 0 No PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) 19(<20) <10 <10 320°' 3,100 - 25.3 f 30 29 0 0 No PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) X180 1JIM <50 3,500°' 5,800 - 43.3 f 18 0 0 PHC F4 >C34 C50 range) 40(<50) <10 <50 10,000 a1 6,100 - NG 30 28 0 0 N -See Note3 Metals Aluminum 9600 7600 1300 NG NG 220,000 c 255009 30 0 0 NA No Antimony 0.21 <0.20 <0.20 NG 7.5 - 0.639 30 29 0 0 No Arsenic 3.6 3 1.7 31 18 - 5.9 30 9 0 0 No Barium 57 45 8.5 10,000 3,800 - 1309 30 0 0 0 No Beryllium 0.45 0.37 <0.20 110 38 - NG 30 22 0 0 N -See Note Bismuth <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 NG NG NG NG 30 30 NA NA N -See text Boron 7.3 6.7 <5.0 NG 4,300 - NG 30 26 0 0 No Boron (Available) 0.33 0.39 <0.05 NG NG NG 1.5 h 20 2 0 0 No Cadmium 0.2 0.18 <0.10 49 1.2 - 0.6 30 21 0 0 No Calcium * 85000 90000 82000 NG NG NGR d NG 30 0 NA NA No Chromium (Hexavalent) <0.20 <0.20 <0.2 NG 160 - NG 30 30 0 0 No Chromium (Total) 15 12 8.2 630 28,000 - 37.3 30 0 0 0 No Cobalt 6.8 5.8 2.7 NG 22 - 50h 30 0 0 0 No Copper 18 16 4.8 4,000 600 - 35.7 30 0 0 0 No Iron 18000 16000 5000 NG NG 164,000 c 20000' 30 0 0 NA No Lead 14 11 4.0 260 200 - 35 30 0 0 0 No Lithium 14 12 3.0 NG NG 460 ° NG 20 0 0 NA No Magnesium * 19000 19000 14000 NG NG NGR d NG 30 0 NA NA No Manganese 630 580 NG NG 5,200 c 460' 0 0 NA Yes Mercury <0.05 <0.05 <0.050 24 9.8 - 0.17 30 30 0 0 No Molybdenum <0.5 <0.5 <0.50 NG 110 - NG 30 30 0 0 No Nickel 15 12 4.2 NG 330 - 16 h 30 0 0 0 No Phosphorus * 960 790 850 NG NG NGR d 600' 30 0 NA NA No Potassium * 1400 1 100 <200 NG NG NGR d NG 30 1 NA NA No Selenium <0.5 <0.5 <0.50 125 110 - NG 30 30 0 0 No Silver <0.2 <0.2 <0.20 NG 77 - 0.5 h 30 30 0 0 No Sodium 160 140 <100 NG 1300 - NG 30 5 0 0 N -See Note Strontium 120 110 96 NG NG 140,000 ° NG 30 0 0 NA N -See Note Sulfur * 690 1000 310 NG NG NGR d NG 20 2 NA NA No Thallium 0.1 <0.050 1 NG 30 23 0 0 Yes Tin <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 NG NG 140,000 c NG 30 30 0 NA No Titanium 268 - 268 NG NG 200,000 d NG 21 0 0 NA N -See Note Tungsten <1 <1 <1 NG NG NG NG 10 6 0 NA No Uranium 0.44 0.49 0.58 33 23 - NG 30 0 0 0 N -See Note Vanadium 23 20 28 NG 39 - NG 30 1 0 0 N -See Note Zinc 62 48 19 NG 5,600 - 123 30 0 0 0 No Zirconium 5 - 1.00 NG NG 18.6 ` NG 6 0 0 NA N -See Note Non -Carcinogenic PAHs Acenaphthene <0.01 <0.005 <0.0050 NG 21 - 0.00671 30 30 0 0 No Acenaphthylene 0.008(<0.01) 0.0083 <0.0050 NG - 0.00587 30 j 28 0 0 Yes 20, Anthracene 0.013 0.01 <0.0050 NG 5,400 - 0.0469 30 25 0 0 No Fluorene 0.0093(<0.01) 0.0071 <0.0050 NG 720 - 0.0212 30 27 0 0 No Methylnaphthalene (Total) 0.0176 0.016 <0.0071 NG 30 - NG 30 15 0 0 No Methylnaphthalene, 1- 0.011 0.0059 <0.0050 NG 30 - NG 30 24 0 0 No Methylnaphthalene, 2- 0.0066(<0.01) 0.01 <0.0050 NG 30 - 0.0202 30 27 0 0 No Naphthalene <0.01 <0.005 <0.0050 NG 93 - 0.0346 30 30 0 0 No Pyrene 0.086 0.076 <0.0050 NG 78 - 0.053 30 3 0 0 Yes Carcinogenic PAHs Benzo(a)anthracene 0.045 0.037 <0.0050 TPE 0.78 - 0.0317 30 9 0 0 N -See Note Benzo(a)pyrene 0.034 0.042 <0.0050 TPE 0.078 - 0.0319 30 9 0 0 N -See Note Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 0.045 0.067 <0.0050 TPE 0.78 - NG 30 5 0 0 N -See Note Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.021 0.033 <0.0050 TPE 7.8 - NG 30 16 0 0 N -See Note Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.017 0.023 <0.0050 TPE 0.78 - NG 30 20 0 0 N -See Note Chrysene 0.043 0.041 <0.0050 TPE 7.8 - 0.0571 30 9 0 0 N -See Note Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene <0.01 0.0071 <0.0050 TPE 0.078 - 0.00622 30 29 0 0 N -See Note Fluoranthene 0.1 0.095 <0.0050 TPE 7.8 - 0.1 1 1 30 3 0 0 N -See Note Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.025 0.037 <0.0050 TPE 0.78 - 0.2h 30 14 0 0 N -See Note Phenanthrene 0.066 1 0.048 1 <0.0050 1 TPE 17 1 - 1 0.0419 1 30 1 6 1 0 1 0 1 N -See Note B a P TPE 0.053 1 0.066 1 <0.0121 1 1 5.3 NA I - I NA I - I - 1 0 1 NA I No Sta ntec 122511 Pagee 1 1 of of 6 6 Table C-1 Human Health Screening of Sediment Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada 41PSediment Sediment Core Background Federal MOECC Other Federal Number of Number of Samples Samples ILParameterA Maximum Concentration Site Maximum Site Sediment Human Health Human Health Jurisdiction Concentration Concentration Guideline a Guideline b Guideline Ecological Site Samples Guideline e (including Non -Detect Samples Exceeding Federal Exceeding Carried MOECC Forward? (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) duplicates) Guideline0 .- Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 NG NG 300 ` 0.007' 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1221 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 NG NG 6.6 NG 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1232 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 NG NG 6.6 ° NG 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1242 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 NG NG 10C NG 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1248 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 NG NG 10 C 0.03' 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1254 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 NG NG 10 C 0.06 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1260 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 NG NG 10 C 0.005' 27 27 0 NA No Aroclor 1262 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 NG NG NG NG 27 27 NA NA No Aroclor 1268 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 NG NG NG NG 27 27 NA NA No Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 NG 0.35 - 0.0341 27 27 0 0 No Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin <0.0030 <0.0020 _0.0020 NG 0.56 - 0.002 h 27 27 0 0 No Aldrin + Dieldrin <0.0030 <0.0020 _0.0020 NG NG NG NG 20 20 NA NA N -See text BHC, alpha- <0.0030 <0.0020 _0.0020 NG NG 3.7 c 0.006' 27 27 0 NA No BHC, beta- <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 13 c 0.005' 27 27 0 NA No BHC, delta- <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 0.19 d 0.003' 27 27 0 NA No Chlordane (Total) 0.002(<0.003) <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 0.59 - 0.0045 27 25 0 0 No Chlordane, alpha- <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 54 d NG 27 27 0 NA No Chlordane, gamma- 0.002(<0.003) <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 46 d NG 27 25 0 NA No DDD, o,p'- 0.008 0.0049 <0.0020 NG NG NG NG 27 22 NA NA Yes DDD (p,p'-DDD) 0.022 0.015 <0.0020 NG NG NG 0.008' 27 20 NA NA Yes DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- 0.03 0.02 <0.0020 NG 3.3 0.00354 27 20 0 0 Yes DDE, o,p'- <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG NG NG 27 27 NA NA N -See text DDE (p,p'-DDE) 0.035 0.013 <0.0020 NG NG 68 c 0.005' 27 8 0 NA Yes DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- 0.035 0.013 <0.0020 NG 2.3 - 0.00142 27 8 0 0 Yes DDT, o,p'- <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG NG NG 27 27 NA NA N -See text DDT (p,p'-DDT) 0.006 0.0026 <0.0020 NG NG NG NG 27 21 NA NA _Yes DDT, o,p'-+ DDT, p,p'- 0.006 0.0026 <0.0020 NG NG NG 0.008' 27 21 NA NA No DDT + Metabolites 0.07 0.035 <0.0020 NG NG NG NG 27 8 0 0 Yes DDT Total 0.07 0 - <0.0020 NG 2.3 - 0.00119 0 7 1 0 0 I Yes Dieldrin <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 0.94 - 0.00285 27 27 0 0 N -See text Endosulfan <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 38 - NG 27 27 0 0 No Endosulfan 1 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 9.2 d NG 27 27 0 NA No Endosulfan II <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 28 d NG 27 27 0 NA No Endosulfan Sulfate <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 1,400 d NG 27 27 0 NA No Endrin <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 4.7 - 0.00267 27 27 0 0 No Endrin Aldehyde <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 40 d NG 27 27 0 NA No Endrin Ketone <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 15.2 d NG 27 27 0 NA No Heptachlor <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 0.15 - NG 27 27 0 0 No Heptachlor Epoxide <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 0.11 - 0.0006 27 27 0 0 No Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG NG NG 20 20 NA NA N -See text Hexachlorobenzene <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 0.52 - 0.02 h 27 27 0 0 No Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 NG 0.52 - NG 27 27 0 0 No Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 NG NG 1.5 c NG 20 20 0 NA No Hexachloroethane <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 NG 0.49 - NG 27 27 0 0 No Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG 0.25 - 0.00094 27 27 0 0 N -See text Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 NG 0.38 - NG 27 27 0 0 No Mirex <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 NG NG 1.3 c 0.007' 27 27 0 NA No Octachlorostyrene <0.005 <0.0020 <0.0050 NG NG NG NG 27 27 NA NA N -See text Toxaphene (Camphechlor) 1 <0.12 1 <0.080 1 <0.080 1 NG NG 21 c NG 1 27 1 27 1 0 1 NA No Notes < = reported detection limit - = value not required NG = no guideline available NA = not applicable; no guideline available for comparison 'Background calculated as the maximum of background samples collected by Terrapex (2013) and Stantec (2015). 2 Total xylenes do not exceed the selected guideline, xylenes are not carried forward. 3 Although no suitable ecological -based guideline was identified, this chemical does not have a high potential for bioaccumulation, and is therefore not carried forward. 4 Carcinogenic PAHs are assessed based on B(a)P TPE; as B(a)P TPE does not exceed, these are not carried forward. CCME Canadian SQG for the Protection of Environmental and Human Health; lowest of applicable human health guidelines, commericial land -use, coarse soil. °' CCME Canada -Wide Standards for PHCs in Soil; lowest human health guideline, commercial land use for coarse-grained surface soils. b MOECC Site Condition Standards. Soil Components for Table 9 - Within 30m of a Water Body (default to Table 2 - Res/Park Full Depth, Potable Water Scenario, for coarse textured soil. Lowest of soil contact and soil leaching to potable groundwater guideline values). USEPA RBC Regional Screening Levels; industrial soil (USEPA, 2014). Hazard quotient values adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR=1 E-05. d TCEQ Texas Risk Reduction Program Protective Concentration Levels (Nov. 2014). Table 2 - Commercial Soil PCLs, 30 acre source area; HQ values adjusted to HQ=0.2. e CCME Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater interim sediment quality guidelines (ISQG). (Atlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Version 3.0; chronic narcosis -based sediment toxicity benchmarks. 9 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Screening Quick Reference Tables; freshwater sediment, most conservative value; marine value adopted if freshwater value unavailable. h MOECC Site Condition Standards. Table 9 - Sediment Components for Within 30m of a Water Body. ' OMOE Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach, May 2008; lowest effect level (LEL). *According to TCEQ TRRP these chemicals are inherently non-toxic, and are therefore not carried forward in the HHRH. Grey highlighting indicates that the chemical exceeds applicable guideline and is carried forward in the HHRA. �l Stantec 122511 Pagee 2 2 of of 6 6 Table C-2 Human Health Screening of Surface Water Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Surface Wate Background Federal Ontario Other Number of Site Samples Samples Number of Maximum Sit urface Watel[rinking Water Drinking Water Jurisdiction Samples Exceeding Exceeding Carried Parameter Non -Detect - Samples Concentratio oncentratiorl Guideline Standard Guideline (including field L6nqram.A. (pg/L) I L (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L) duplicates) Guideline Guideline' General Chemistry Hardness (as CaCO3; mg/L) 240 170 NGR 80-100 1 0 NA N -See text pH 8.24 8.08-8.22 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 - 1 0 0 0 No Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (mg/L 0.62 1.4 NGR NG 11 Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene <0.20 <0.20 5 5 - 11 11 0 0 No Toluene 0.53 <0.20 60 24 b2 - 11 10 0 0 No Ethylbenzene <0.20 <0.20 140 2.4 b2 - 11 11 0 0 No Xylene, m & p- <0.40 <0.20 NG NG 38c 11 10 0 NA No Xylene, o- <0.20 <0.20 NG NG 38c 11 11 0 NA No Xylenes, Total <0.40 <0.20 90 300 b2 - 11 10 0 0 No PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) <25 <25 NG NG 820 e 11 11 NA 0 No PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) <100 <100 NG NG 300 e 11 11 NA 0 No PHC F3 (>C 16-C34 range) <200 <200 NG NG 1000 e 11 11 NA 0 No PHC F4 >C34-050 range) <200 <200 NG NG 1 100 e 11 11 NA 0 No Metals Aluminum 710 792 100 a2 10012 4000c 11 0 10 10 N -See text Antimony <0.50 <0.5 6 6 - 11 11 0 0 No Arsenic 0.8 0.69 10 25 - 11 0 0 0 No Barium 49.6 44.2 1000 1000 - 11 0 0 0 No Beryllium <0.10 <0.10 NG NG 5c 11 11 0 0 No Bismuth <1.0 <1.0 NG NG 7400' 11 11 0 NA No Boron <50 <50 5000 5000 - 11 11 0 0 No Cadmium 0.016 0.014 5 5 - 11 3 0 0 No Calcium * 90900 50100 NGR NG - 11 0 NA NA No Chromium (Hexavalent) <0.50 <0.50 50 NG - 11 11 10 NA No Chromium (Total) <1.0 <1.0 50 50 - 11 11 0 0 No Cobalt <0.50 <0.50 NG NG 1.2 c 11 11 0 NA No Copper 2.09 2.48 1000c2 1000 b2 160c 11 0 0 0 No Iron 762 968 300 a2 300 b2 2800 c 11 0 10 10 N -See text Lead 0.57 0.8 10 10 - 11 2 0 0 No Lithium <5.0 <5.0 NG NG 8c 11 1 0 NA No Magnesium * 18000 11100 NGR NG NGR' 11 0 NA NA No Manganese 72.4 58.5 50 a2 50 b2 86c 11 0 3 3 No Mercury <0.01 <0.01 1 1 - 11 11 0 0 No Molybdenum <1.0 1.1 NG NG 20c 11 11 0 NA No Nickel 1.4 1.6 NG NG 78 c 11 7 0 NA No Phosphorus 48 40 0 Potassium * 2770 2530 NG NG NGR d 11 0 NA NA No Selenium 0.22 0.21 50 10 - 11 1 0 0 No Silicon * 5140 1860 NG NG NGR d 11 0 NA NA No Silver <0.020 <0.020 NGR NG 18.8 c 11 11 0 NA No Sodium 58700 11200 200000 a2 200000 b2 NGR d 11 0 0 0 No Strontium 329 212 NG NG 2400 c 11 0 0 NA No Sulfur * 14600 11600 NG NG NGR d 11 0 NA NA No Thallium <0.050 <0.050 NG NG 0.04 ` 11 11 10 0 Yes Tin <5.0 <5.0 NG NG 2400 c 11 11 0 NA No Titanium 42.7 26.2 NG NG 74000 d 11 2 0 NA No Uranium 0.84 0.73 20 20 - 11 0 0 0 No Vanadium <5.0 <5.0 NG NG 17.2 c 11 11 0 NA No Zinc 46.2 9.3 5000 a2 5000 b2 12000c 11 6 0 0 No Zirconium <0.50 <0.50 NG NG 0.32 e 11 1 10 NA Yes Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 106c 11 11 0 0 No Acenaphthylene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 880 d 11 11 0 0 No Anthracene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 360 c 11 11 0 0 No Benzo(a)anthracene 0.013 <0.010 NG NG 0.34 c 11 10 0 0 No Benzo(a)pyrene 0.015 <0.010 0.01 0.01 - 11 10 1 Yes NA Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 0.02 <0.010 NG NG 0.34 c 11 10 0 No Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 440 d 1 1 1 1 0 0 No Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 3.4 c 11 11 0 0 No Chrysene 0.014 <0.010 NG NG 34c 11 10 0 0 No Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 0.034 c 11 11 0 0 No Fluoranthene 0.014 <0.010 NG NG 160 c 11 10 0 0 No Fluorene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 58c 11 11 0 0 No Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyre ne <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 0.34 a 11 11 0 0 No Methylnaphthalene, 1- <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 11 c 11 11 0 0 No Methylnaphthalene, 2- 0.011 <0.010 NG NG 7.2 c 11 10 0 0 No Naphthalene 0.015 <0.010 NG NG 1.7 c 11 10 0 0 No Phenanthrene <0.010 <0.010 NG NG 440 d 11 11 0 0 No Pyrene 0.013 <0.010 NG NG 80c 11 10 0 0 No Sta ntec 122511 Pagee 3 3 of of 6 6 Table C-2 Human Health Screening of Surface Water Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Surface Wate Background Federal Ontario Other Number of Site Samples Samples Number of Maximum Sitl[Surface Watel rinking Water Drinking Water Jurisdiction Samples Exceeding Exceeding Carried Parameter Non -Detect Concentratio oncentration, Guideline 'i Standards bI Guideline (including field Site Samples Federal MOECC Forward? La c o na e p eny Aroclor 1016 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 11 ` 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1221 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 0.39 c 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1232 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 0.39 c 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1242 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 0.39 ` 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1248 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 0.39 c 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1254 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 0.39 c 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1260 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG 0.39 c 10 10 0 NA No Aroclor 1262 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG NG 10 10 NA NA N -See text Aroclor 1268 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG NG 10 10 NA NA N -See text Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 1 <0.05 <0.05 NG 3 - 10 10 1 0 0 No Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin <0.005 <0.003 NG 0.7 2 - 11 11 0 0 No Aldrin + Dieldrin <0.005 <0.005 NG 0.7 - 11 10 0 0 No BHC, alpha- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 0.071 c 1 1 11 0 NA No BHC, beta- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 0.25 c 11 11 0 NA No BHC, delta- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 1.1 d 11 11 0 NA No Chlordane (Total) <0.005 <0.005 NG 7 - 11 10 0 0 No Chlordane, alpha- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 5.8 d 11 11 0 NA No Chlordane, gamma- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 5.8 d 11 11 0 NA No DDD, o,p'- <0.005 <0.001 NG NG NG 11 11 NA NA N -See text DDD (p,p'-DDD) <0.005 <0.001 NG NG NG 11 11 NA NA N -See text DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- <0.005 <0.005 NG NG 0.31 c 11 10 0 NA No DDE, c,p'- <0.005 <0.001 NG NG NG 1 1 11 NA NA N -See text DDE (p,p'-DDE) <0.005 <0.001 NG NG 2.3 ` 11 11 0 NA No DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- <0.005 <0.005 NG NG 6.0 d 11 10 0 NA No DDT, o,p'- <0.005 <0.001 NG NG NG 11 11 NA NA N -See text DDT (p,p'-DDT) <0.005 <0.001 NG NG NG 11 11 NA NA N -See text DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- <0.005 <0.005 NG 30 - 11 10 0 0 No DDT+ Metabolites <0.005 <0.005 NG 30 - 11 10 0 0 No Dieldrin <0.005 <0.003 NG 0.7 2 - 11 11 0 0 No Endosulfan 1 <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 30 d 11 11 0 NA No Endosulfan II <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 88 d 11 11 0 NA No Endosulfan Sulfate <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 88 d 11 11 0 NA No Endosulfan (Total) <0.005 <0.005 NG NG 20 ` 11 10 0 NA No Endrin <0.005 <0.005 NG NG 0.46 c 11 11 0 NA No Endrin Aldehyde <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 4.4 d 11 11 0 NA No Endrin Ketone <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 4.4 d 11 11 0 NA No Heptachlor <0.005 <0.003 NG 3 3 - 11 11 0 0 No Heptachlor Epoxide <0.005 <0.003 NG 3 3 - 11 11 0 0 No Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide <0.005 <0.005 NG 3 3 - 11 10 0 0 No Hexachlorobenzene <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 0.098 a 11 11 0 NA No Hexachlorobutadiene <0.009 <0.004 NG NG 1.4 ` 11 11 0 NA No (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.02 <0.01 NG NG 0.082 c 11 11 0 NA No Hexachloroethane <0.01 <0.003 NG NG 3.3 ` 11 11 0 NA No Lindane <0.003 <0.003 NG 4 - 11 11 0 0 No (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) <0.01 <0.003 NG 900 - 11 11 0 0 No Mirex <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 0.0088 ` 11 11 0 NA No Octachlorostyrene <0.005 <0.003 NG NG NG 11 11 NA NA N -See text Oxychlordane <0.005 <0.003 NG NG 11.6 d 11 11 0 NA No Toxaphene (Camphechlor) 1 <0.2 1 <0.2 1 1 1 1 11 1 10 Notes < = reported detection limit - = value not required NG = no guideline available NA = not applicable; no guideline available for comparison Background calculated as the maximum of background samples collected by Terrapex (2013) and Stantec (2015). 2 Sum concentration of Aldrin + Dieldrin cannot exceed 0.7 ug/L. 3 Sum concentraion of Heptachlor + Heptachlor Epoxide cannot exceed 3 ug/L. a' HC Guidance for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (2014); maximum acceptable concentration (MAC). a2 HC Guidance for Canadian Drinking Water Quality (2014); aesthetic objectives (AO) or operation guidance value (OG). b' OMOE Technical Support Document for Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines; MAC (2003, revised 2006). b2 OMOE Technical Support Document for Ontario Drinking Water Standards, Objectives and Guidelines; AO or OG (2003, revised 2006). a USEPA RBC Regional Screening Levels; residential tapwater (USEPA, June 2015). Hazard quotient values adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR=1 E-05. d TCEQ Texas Risk Reduction Program Protective Concentration Levels (Nov. 2014). Table 3 - Commercial GW PCLs; HQ values adjusted to HQ=0.2. 'OMOE Site Condition Standards. Groundwater Components for Potable Water Scenario, coarse textured soil. *According to TCEQ TRRP these chemicals are inherently non-toxic, and are therefore not carried forward in the HHRA. Grey highlighting indicates chemical exceeds the applicable guideline and is carried forward in HHRA. Stantec 122511 Pagee 4 4 of of 6 6 Table C-3 Human Health Screening of Fish Tissue Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sta ntec 122511 Pagee 5 5 of of 6 6 Tissue Reference ResidueFish Tissue Number. Parameter Maximum Sit Concentratio F ish Tissu . e oncentration Quality Criteria 2,3 (mg/kg) Number of Site Samples Non -Detect Site Samples Exceeding Federal Guideline Carried Forward? Metals Antimony 0.2 0.1 0.86 5 4 0 No Arsenic <0.05 <0.05 0.062 5 5 0 No Barium <0.3 <0.3 150 5 5 0 No Beryllium <0.05 <0.05 10800 5 5 0 No Bismuth <0.05 <0.05 NV 5 5 NA N -See Text Boron <0.5 <0.5 194 5 5 0 No Cadmium 0.04 <0.01 1.08 5 2 0 No Calcium * 400 1000 NV 5 0 NA N -See Text Chromium (Total) <0.3 <0.3 10.8 5 5 0 No Cobalt 0.012 <0.005 NV 5 1 NA Yes Copper 1.7 0.6 80 5 1 0 No Iron 29 5 NV 5 0 NA Yes Lead <0.03 <0.03 0.8 5 5 0 No Magnesium * 260 300 NV 5 0 NA N -See Text Manganese 0.3 0.7 10.8 5 4 0 No Mercury 0.17 0.1 0.5 5 0 0 No Molybdenum <0.05 <0.05 10.8 5 5 0 No Nickel <0.05 <0.05 44 5 5 0 No Phosphorus 2400 2900 NV 5 0 NA N -See Text Potassium * 4700 4200 NV 5 0 NA N -See Text Selenium 0.8 0.9 10.8 5 0 0 No Silver <0.05 <0.05 10.8 5 5 0 No Sodium* 570 370 NV 5 0 NA No Strontium <0.5 1 1300 5 5 0 No Thallium 0.005 0.024 NV 5 3 NA No Tin <0.3 <0.3 1300 5 5 0 No Titanium 2 2.4 NV 5 0 NA No Uranium 0.007 <0.005 NV 5 3 NA Yes Vanadium <0.3 <0.3 15 5 5 0 No Zinc 16 7 640 5 0 0 No Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 <0.03 <0.03 0.15 5 5 0 No Aroclor 1221 <0.03 <0.03 0.044 5 5 0 No Aroclor 1232 <0.03 <0.03 0.044 5 5 0 No Aroclor 1242 <0.03 <0.03 0.044 5 5 0 No Aroclor 1248 <0.03 <0.03 0.044 5 5 0 No Aroclor 1254 0.21 <0.03 0.044 5 2 0 No Aroclor 1260 0.31 <0.03 0.044 5 1 0 No Aroclor 1262 <0.03 <0.03 NV 5 5 NA N -See Text Aroclor 1268 <0.03 <0.03 NV 5 5 NA N -See Text Polychlorinated Biphenyls PCBs 0.5 <0.03 2 5 1 0 No Sta ntec 122511 Pagee 5 5 of of 6 6 Table C-3 Human Health Screening of Fish Tissue Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada b,,:Parameter-Non-Detect Organochlorine Pesticides Tissue Concentratio (mg/kg) Irr(mg/kg) Reference oncentration ResidueFish Tissue (mg/kg) Samples Number. Site Samples Federal Guideline Forward? Aldrin <0.02 <0.02 0.064 5 5 0 No Aldrin + Dieldrin <0.02 <0.02 0.3 5 5 0 No BHC, alpha- <0.02 <0.02 0.017 5 5 0 N -See Text BHC, beta- <0.02 <0.02 0.06 5 5 0 No BHC, delta- <0.02 <0.02 0.06 5 5 0 No Chlordane (Total) <0.02 <0.02 0.13 5 5 0 No Chlordane, alpha- <0.02 <0.02 0.13 5 5 0 No Chlordane, gamma- <0.02 <0.02 0.13 5 5 0 No DDD, o,p'- <0.02 <0.02 0.45 5 5 0 No DDD (p,p'-DDD) 0.03 <0.02 0.45 5 4 0 No DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- 0.03 <0.02 NV 5 4 NA No DDE, o,p'- <0.02 <0.02 0.32 5 5 0 No DDE (p,p'-DDE) 0.09 <0.02 0.32 5 3 0 No DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- 0.09 <0.02 NV 5 3 NA No DDT, o,p'- <0.02 <0.02 1.08 5 5 0 No DDT (p,p'-DDT) <0.02 <0.02 1.08 5 5 0 No DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- <0.02 <0.02 1.08 5 5 0 No DDT+ Metabolites 0.12 <0.02 1.08 5 3 0 No Dieldrin <0.02 <0.02 0.108 5 5 0 No Endosulfan 1 <0.02 <0.02 13 5 5 0 No Endosulfan II <0.03 <0.03 13 5 5 0 No Endosulfan Sulfate <0.02 <0.02 NV 5 5 NA No Endosulfan (Total) <0.03 <0.03 13 5 5 0 No Endrin <0.02 <0.02 0.3 5 5 0 No Endrin Aldehyde <0.02 <0.02 NV 5 5 NA No Heptachlor <0.02 <0.02 1.08 5 5 0 No Heptachlor Epoxide <0.02 <0.02 0.028 5 5 0 No Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide <0.02 <0.02 0.3 5 5 0 No Hexachlorobenzene <0.02 <0.02 1.72 5 5 0 No Lindane <0.02 <0.02 0.083 5 5 0 No (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) <0.08 <0.08 10.8 5 5 0 No Mirex <0.02 <0.02 0.44 5 5 0 No Octachlorostyrene <0.02 <0.02 NV 5 5 NA No Toxaphene <0.5 1 <0.5 1 0.098 1 5 1 5 1 0 1 N -See Text Notes < = reported detection limit - = value not required NG = no guideline available NA = not applicable; no guideline available for comparison ' Background calculated as the maximum of background samples collected by Terrapex (2013) and Stantec (2015). 2 A Compendium of Environmental Quality Benchmarks (Environment Canada, 2000). 3 When required, hazard quotient values adjusted to HQ=0.2 or TR=1 E-05. *According to TCEQ TRRP these chemicals are inherently non-toxic, and are therefore not carried forward in the HHRA Grey highlighting indicates chemical exceeds the applicable guideline and is carried forward in HHRA. Stantec 122511076.300 Pageeof66 of 6 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix D Human Health Toxicity Profiles September 11, 2015 ®npendi r) Human Health Toxicity Profiles ® Stantec a Stantec Table of Contents APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 3 1.1 NON -CARCINOGENIC TRVS............................................................................................ 3 1.2 CARCINOGENIC TRVS......................................................................................................4 1.3 BIOAVAILABILITY................................................................................................................4 2.0 UBIQUITOUS ELEMENTS.................................................................................................. 5 2.1 CALCIUM............................................................................................................................5 2.2 MAGNESIUM...................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 PHOSPHORUS.....................................................................................................................5 2.4 POTASSIUM.........................................................................................................................5 2.5 SODIUM.............................................................................................................................. 6 2.6 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................6 3.0 COBALT..........................................................................................................................6 3.1 ASSESSMENT OF CARCINOGENICITY.............................................................................. 7 3.2 SUSCEPTIBLE POPULATIONS.............................................................................................. 7 3.3 SELECTION OF NON -CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES ........................ 7 3.3.1 Oral Exposure.................................................................................................. 7 3.3.2 Inhalation Exposure........................................................................................8 3.4 SELECTION OF CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES .................................. 8 3.5 BIOAVAILABILITY................................................................................................................8 3.6 SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................... 8 3.7 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................8 4.0 POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS (PAHS)................................................... 9 4.1 ASSESSMENT OF CARCINOGENICITY.............................................................................. 9 4.2 SUSCEPTIBLE POPULATIONS............................................................................................ 10 4.3 SELECTION OF TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES.............................................................. 10 4.3.1 Carcinogenic PAHs - Benzo(a)pyrene...................................................... 10 4.4 BIOAVAILABILITY..............................................................................................................12 4.5 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 12 4.6 REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................12 5.0 THALLIUM.....................................................................................................................14 5.1 SUSCEPTIBLE POPULATIONS............................................................................................ 14 5.2 ASSESSMENT OF CARCINOGENICITY............................................................................ 15 5.3 SELECTION OF CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES ................................ 15 5.4 SELECTION OF NON -CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES ...................... 15 5.4.1 Oral Exposure................................................................................................ 15 5.4.2 Inhalation Exposure...................................................................................... 15 5.5 BIOAVAILABILITY..............................................................................................................16 5.6 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 16 Design with community in mind Page 1 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. ta, tec APPENDIX D •7 Human Health Toxicity Profiles 5.7 REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................16 6.0 URANIUM.....................................................................................................................17 6.1 SELECTION OF TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES.............................................................. 17 6.1.1 Oral Exposure................................................................................................ 17 6.1.2 Inhalation Exposure...................................................................................... 18 6.2 BIOAVAILABILITY.............................................................................................................. 18 6.3 CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................. 18 6.4 REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................19 Design with community in mind Page 2 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 1.0 Introduction APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles For the purpose of this assessment, toxicity reference values (TRVs) were obtained for each of the identified contaminants of potential concern (COPCs). Toxicological information was obtained, as necessary, from various sources including Health Canada, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). TRVs are values used to describe maximum acceptable doses of chemicals that will not result in the development of adverse health effects. TRVs can be used to describe non -carcinogenic and carcinogenic effects and can express effects in different terms based on the magnitude of the dose, length of exposure and route of exposure. 1.1 NON -CARCINOGENIC TRVS Non -carcinogenic chemicals exhibit threshold effects following exposure. Threshold effects are defined by the observation of adverse effects at a given dose or concentration. Given these threshold effects, two measures of interest can describe the dose -response curve: the no -adverse - effects -level (NOAEL) and lowest -adverse -effects -level (LOAEL). The NOAEL is the benchmark at which the highest dose does not result in observed adverse effects. The NOAEL is primarily used in the derivation of non -carcinogenic TRVs; however, the LOAEL may be used when a NOAEL is not available. The reference dose (RfD; oral exposure) and reference concentration (RfC; inhalation exposure) are used in the assessment of non -carcinogenic endpoints. They are estimates of lifetime daily exposure to a non -carcinogenic substance for the general human population that appears to be without appreciable risk of deleterious effects. The RfD and RfC are derived from either the NOAEL or the LOAEL determined in a laboratory study. Uncertainty factors (UFs) are applied to the NOAEL or LOAEL to account for interspecies and intraspecies (i.e., sensitive sub -populations) variability. Uncertainty factors are also applied to extrapolate from subchronic exposure to chronic exposure or where there is a paucity of data available for a chemical. Other regulatory agencies have alternate terms for the RfD and RfC, which are reflective of objectives and toxicological endpoints. Health Canada replaces the term RfD with tolerable daily intake (TDI) and replaces RfC with tolerable concentration (TC). The Institute of Medicine (IOM) uses the tolerable upper intake level (UL) expressed as mg chemical/day to describe the highest daily nutrient intake that will not result in adverse health effects. The ATSDR uses a minimal risk level (MRL) similar to the IOM's UL that estimates daily human exposure to a substance that, over a specified duration period, will not cause an appreciable risk of adverse effects. Design with community in mind Page g of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 1.2 CARCINOGENIC TRVS APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles Carcinogenic chemicals exhibit non -threshold effects following exposure. Non -threshold effects are defined by the observation of adverse effects regardless of concentration and length of exposure. Primarily, two TRVs are used to describe carcinogenic effects: slope factor and unit risk. A slope factor (SF) is used for assessment of carcinogenic effects of a chemical. The SF is a plausible upper -bound estimate of the probability of a response per unit intake of a chemical over a lifetime, expressed as (mg/kg body weight/day)-'. It is used to estimate an upper bound probability of an individual developing cancer as a result of exposure to a particular level of a potential carcinogen. Unit risks (UR) are used to estimate an upper bound probability of an individual developing cancer as a result of exposure to a particular level (e.g., 1 pg/L in water or 1 pg/m3 in air) of a potential carcinogen. Unit risks are calculated by dividing the SF by body weight and multiplying that product by the inhalation or drinking rate as applicable. 1.3 BIOAVAILABILITY The definition of bioavailability varies with the source and context in which the term is used. The simplest and broadest definition of bioavailability describes the extent or rate that a chemical enters a receptor or is made available at the target site (i.e., blood). The importance of bioavailability in risk assessment is illustrated by comparison of TRVs as toxicity measures that are usually defined by laboratory studies. The fraction of a dose which is absorbed during an animal study may differ from the fraction that is available to a receptor in the environment due to several factors (e.g., weathering). There are two specific types of bioavailability that are applicable to risk assessment: absolute and relative. Absolute bioavailability is the fraction or percentage of an administered dose that reaches systemic circulation (blood). Relative bioavailability is the absolute bioavailability in one medium divided by the absolute bioavailability of the chemical under the conditions used to derive the TRV. Therefore, the relative bioavailability is a comparative fraction which predicts bioavailability in one medium or form in relation to the medium for which the TRV was derived. Relative bioavailability can be expressed as a relative absorption factor (RAF). In the following toxicity profiles, both absolute and relative bioavailabilities have been provided, where applicable, with the relative absorption factor selected for use in the assessment. Design with community in mind Page 4 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 2.0 Ubiquitous Elements 2.1 CALCIUM APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles Calcium is expected to be present in its ionic form in the overburden groundwater (CRC, 2004). Calcium is an essential mineral for living organisms, and one of the major components of bone in animals: in humans, over 99% of the calcium stored in the human body is found in the skeletal system (IOM, 1997). Calcium serves many functions in living organisms, but in the human body, its other major roles are the mediation of vascular contraction, vasodilation, muscle contraction, nerve transmission, and glandular secretion (IOM, 1997). It is also ubiquitous, as it makes up over 3% of the Earth's crust by weight, corresponding to an average concentration of 41 500 mg/kg (CRC, 2004), and is found at an average concentration of 412 mg/L in seawater. Given its essentiality and its common occurrence in the environment, calcium is not expected to contribute to excess health risks, and a quantitative assessment of the risk due to calcium is therefore considered unnecessary. 2.2 MAGNESIUM Magnesium is expected to be present in its ionic form in groundwater (CRC, 2004). Magnesium is an essential mineral for living organisms; the average adult human body contains about 25 g of magnesium (IOM, 1997). It is a required cofactor for various enzymes, and plays a role in both anaerobic and aerobic energy generation in the body, as part of the glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation processes (IOM, 1997). It is also a fundamental component of chlorophyll in green plants (CRC, 2004). It makes up an average of 23 300 mg/kg of the Earth's crust, and can be found in seawater at an average concentration of 1290 mg/L. Because it is essential for life, and because it occurs commonly, magnesium is not expected to pose any excess health risk, and a quantitative evaluation is thus not necessary. 2.3 PHOSPHORUS Making up an average of 1050 mg/kg of the Earth's crust, phosphorus in nature is most commonly found as phosphate (P043-) (CRC, 2004), and is therefore assumed to be present in this form in the overburden groundwater. Phosphorus, as phosphate, is an essential constituent of plant and animal tissues, where it plays several roles, including pH maintenance, catalytic protein activation, and energy transfer and temporary storage (IOM, 1997). Phosphorus itself makes up 0.65% to 1.1 % of adult human body weight (IOM, 1997). Given its essentiality to life, and its relative abundance in the Earth's crust, phosphorus in the soil, surface water, or groundwater is not expected to pose any excess risk to receptors, and a quantitative evaluation for phosphorus is therefore considered unnecessary 2.4 POTASSIUM Potassium is expected to be present in its ionic form in groundwater (CRC, 2004). Potassium ions are required for plant growth (CRC, 2004), and for normal cellular function in both plants and animals (IOM, 2004). Potassium is also abundant in the Earth's crust, making up 2.4% of the crust by weight, Design with community in mind Page 5 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles at an average concentration of 29 000 mg/kg (CRC, 2004), and is present in seawater at a concentration of 399 mg/L (CRC, 2004). Given its ubiquity and its essentiality to life, it is therefore reasonable to conclude that potassium is not expected to result in excess risk to human receptors, and a quantitative evaluation of this COPC is therefore considered unnecessary. 2.5 SODIUM This element is expected to be present in its ionic form in groundwater (CRC, 2004). Sodium ions are essential to life, as they are required in living organisms to maintain extracellular fluid volume and serum osmolality (IOM, 2004). Given that sodium also makes up 2.6% of the Earth's crust, at an average concentration of 23 600 mg/kg (CRC, 2004), and exists in seawater at a concentration of 10 800 mg/L, combined with its essentiality to life, it is not expected that sodium in groundwater will pose excess risk to human health, and a quantitative assessment of sodium is therefore considered unnecessary. 2.6 REFERENCES CRC (David R. Lide, ed.). 2004. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, Internet Version 2004 (85th Edition), Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL. FASEB (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology). 1974. Evaluation of the health aspects of certain ammonium salts as food ingredients. NTIS PPB -254-532. Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Springfield, VA. IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1997. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride. IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1994. Dietary Reference Intakes: Water, Potassium, Sodium, Chloride, and Sulfate. WHO (World Health Organization). 2006. Iron supplementation of young children in regions where malaria transmission is intense and infectious disease highly prevalent. K1111w4feleme fil Cobalt is a naturally -occurring element that is found in small amounts in rocks, soil, water, plants, and animals, often combined with other elements such as oxygen, sulfur, and arsenic. A biochemically important cobalt compound is vitamin B-12 or cyanocobalamin, which is essential for good health in animals and humans (ATSDR, 2001). Vitamin B-12 cannot be synthesized by humans and must be ingested via dietary sources (IOM, 2000). Cobalt is essential in the human body because it is an integral component of Vitamin B-12 and functions as a co-enzyme for several enzymes critical in the synthesis of hemoglobin and the prevention of pernicious anemia (IOM, 2000). No essential biological function of inorganic cobalt in the human body has been identified (ATS DR, 2001). Design with community in mind Page 6 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles In high doses cobalt can cause toxic effects in humans. High level exposure can result in heart and lung effects and dermatitis. Effects on the liver and kidney have also been observed in animals exposed to high levels of cobalt (ATSDR, 2004). 3.1 ASSESSMENT OF CARCINOGENICITY The ATSDR (2001) discusses carcinogenicity data in its toxicological profile for cobalt; however, it does not currently assess cancer potency. The USEPA and Health Canada have not classified cobalt for carcinogenicity. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC, 1991), however, has classified cobalt and cobalt compounds as Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans. For this assessment, cobalt is being assessed as a non -carcinogen. 3.2 SUSCEPTIBLE POPULATIONS Individuals that are already sensitized to cobalt may be unusually susceptible to cobalt -triggered asthmatic attacks. Allergic dermatitis was reported in some cobalt -sensitized individuals following oral challenge with cobalt and dermal patch test. Exposure levels associated with sensitization to cobalt have not been established (ATSDR, 2001). 3.3 SELECTION OF NON -CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES Numerous sources were consulted in order to obtain toxicological and benchmark values for COPCs. A summary of the reviewed studies, and the rationale for the selection of the TRVs used in the HHRA, is outlined below. 3.3.1 Oral Exposure No non -carcinogenic oral TRVs were available from Health Canada or the USEPA at the time of the assessment. ATSDR (2001) has developed an intermediate exposure duration MRL of 0.01 mg/kg -day. This is based on a LOAEL of 150 mg/day cobalt as cobalt chloride (1 mg Co/kg-day) exposure for polycythemia as reported in (ATSDR, 2001). Six men were exposed for up to 22 days, which resulted in the development of polycythemia in all six patients. An uncertainty factor of 100 was applied (10 for use of a LOAEL and 10 for human variability). RIVM (2001) selected a TDI of .0014 mg/kg -day based on a migration limit for packaging materials derived in a study by Vermiere et al. (1991). For the onset of cardiomyopathy in humans after intermediate oral exposure, the LOAEL was found to be 0.04 mg/kg -day (RIVM, 2001). After applying an uncertainty factor of 3 for intra -human variation and a factor of 10 to extrapolate to a NOAEL, a TDI of 1.4 pg/kg-day was derived (RIVM 2001). The more conservative RIVM (200 1) TDI of 0.0014 mg/kg -day was selected for the chronic oral exposure limit in the current assessment. Design with community in mind Page 7 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. (11 Stantec 3.3.2 Inhalation Exposure APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles As the inhalation pathway was not assessed as part of this SSRA, no TRV was selected. 3.4 SELECTION OF CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES Cobalt is not classified as a carcinogenic substance; therefore, a carcinogenic oral TRV has not been selected. 3.5 BIOAVAILABILITY For this assessment, the oral bioavailability factor for soil can be conservatively assumed to be 1.0, and the inhalation bioavailability factor can be assumed to be 1.0, in accordance with guidance from Health Canada (2010). 3.6 SUMMARY For cobalt, Table 1 summarizes the selected toxicity reference values and Table 2 summarizes the selected relative bioavailabilities. Table 1 Selected Toxicity Reference Values for Cobalt Table 2 Selected Relative Bioavailabilities for Cobalt 3.7 REFERENCES ACGIH (American Conference of Industrial Hygienists). 2007. TLVs and BEIs Book. ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 2001. Toxicological Profile for Cobalt. September 2001. ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 2004. ToxFAQs for Chromium. August 2004. Health Canada, 2010. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors, Ver. 2.0. September 2010. IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). 1991. IARC Monograph, Volume 52: Chlorinated Drinking - Water; Chlorination By-products; Some Other Halogenated Compound; Cobalt and Cobalt Compounds. Available at: http://193.51.164.11/ monoeval/allmonos.html. Design with community in mind Page 8 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles IOM (Institute of Medicine), 2000. Dietary Reference Intakes for Thiamin, Riboflavin, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Folate, Vitamin B12, Panthothenic Acid, Biotin and Choline. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. MOE (Ministry of the Environment). 2004. Basic Comprehensive Certificates of Approval( Air) - User Guide. Version 2.0. Environmental Assessment & Approvals Branch. April 2004. MOE (Ministry of the Environment). 2008. Summary of O. Reg. 419/05 - Standards and Point of Impingement Guidelines & Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQCs). Standards Development Branch. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. PIBS # 6570e. February, 2008. Nemery B, Casier P and Roosels D, 1992. Survey of cobalt exposure and respiratory health in diamond polishers. Am Rev Respir Dis 145: 610-616. RIVM. 2001. Re-evaluation of human -toxicological maximum permissible risk levels. Rijksinstituut Voor Volksgezondheid En Milieu. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment. RIVM report 711701 025. Published as: Baars et al. 2001 TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality). Updated 2008. Effects Screening Level Lists. Available at: http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/tox/esl/list-main.html WHO (World Health Organization). 2006. Cobalt and Inorganic Cobalt Compounds. Concise International Chemical Assessment Document 69; World Health Organization, Geneva 93 pagesValberg LS, Ludwig J and Olatunbosun D, 1969. Alteration in Cobalt Absorption in Patients with Disorders of Iron Metabolism. Gastroenterology 56(2):241-251. Cited In: ATSDR, 2001. Vermiere, T.G., Apeldoorn, M.E. van, Fouw, J.C. de & Janssen PJCM. 1991. Voorstel voor de humantoxicologishe onderbouwing van C-toetsingswaarden. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, RIVM- report no. 725201005, February 1991; Bilthoven, The Netherlands 4.0 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) comprise a group of chemicals that are formed from the incomplete burning of organic substances (ATSDR, 1995; WHO, 1998). Sources of PAHs in the environment include forest fires, and petroleum or coal tar distillation and fractionation. Benzo(a)pyrene has been used in this assessment as a surrogate to represent all carcinogenic PAHs. Non -carcinogenic PAHs are evaluated individually. Animal studies have shown that PAHs can cause reproductive effects (difficulties reproducing, high rate of birth defects, lower bodyweights - occurring in both adult rats and later in their offspring), and harmful effects on the skin, body fluids, and immune system. This can occur after both short and long-term exposure; however, these effects have not been seen in humans (ATSDR, 1996). 4.1 ASSESSMENT OF CARCINOGENICITY Although there is strong evidence of carcinogenicity for several PAH compounds, reliable carcinogenic toxicity studies have only been conducted for benzo(a)pyrene. The most common method for estimating carcinogenic toxicity values for other carcinogenic PAH compounds is the Design with community in mind Page 9 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles potency equivalence factor (PEF) approach. It is assumed that carcinogenic PAH compounds each have the same biological mechanism of action and biological end-point, but differ in their relative potencies or degrees of carcinogenicity. Different agencies (USEPA, Health Canada, WHO, etc.) provide different PEFs depending on the PAH being considered. 4.2 SUSCEPTIBLE POPULATIONS People with various conditions such as aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase (AHH) are at increased risk from the toxic effects of benzo(a)pyrene (ATDSR, 1995). Furthermore, people who smoke, persons with a history of excessive sun exposure, people with liver and skin diseases and women, especially of childbearing age, are all at risk (ATDSR, 1995). Data also indicates that the general population may be at increased risk of developing lung cancer following prolonged inhalation of PAH - contaminated air and skin cancer following skin exposure to PAHs and sunlight (ATDSR, 1995). Also, individuals who undergo a rapid reduction in weight may be at risk because of the systemic release and activation of PAHs that had been stored in body fat (ATSDR, 1995). People exposed to PAHs in conjunction with particles from tobacco smoke, fossil fuel combustion, coal fly ash, and asbestos fibres are again at an elevated risk of developing toxic effects, primarily cancer (ATSDR, 1995). Women may also be at high risk of reproductive dysfunction and fertility may be reduced by causing ovarian dysfunction (ATSDR, 1995). 4.3 SELECTION OF TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES 4.3.1 Carcinogenic PAHs - Benzo(a)pyrene 4.3.1.1 Potency Equivalency Factors As indicated in Health Canada (2010) and other regulatory guidance, the assessment of risks related to exposures to carcinogenic PAHs is primarily conducted through the use of potency or toxicity equivalence factors (PEF or TEF). PEFs allow large groups of compounds with a common mechanism of action such as PAHs to be assessed when limited data is available for all but one of the compounds (i.e., benzo(a)pyrene). Through this approach, exposures to each of the carcinogenic PAHs are adjusted by their carcinogenic potency relative to benzo(a)pyrene. These potency - adjusted exposures can then be summed to provide an overall exposure to the group of carcinogenic PAHs, based on benzo(a)pyrene as the primary surrogate This approach was utilized in the current assessment. Table 8 shows each of the carcinogenic PAHs evaluated in the current assessment and the respective PEFs selected for use with this approach. Design with community in mind Page io of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles Table 3 Toxic Equivalency Factors Used in the Risk Assessment Benzo(a)anthracene 0.1 Benzo(b+j+k)fluoranthene 0.1 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.01 Benzo(a)pyrene 1 Benzo(c)phenanthrene 0.01 Chrysene 0.01 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 1 Dibenzo(a,h)pyrene 1 Dibenzo(a,i)pyrene 1 Dimethylbenzo(a)anthracene, 7- 12- 10 Fluoranthene 0.001 Indeno(1,2,3 - cd)pyrene 0.1 Phenanthrene 0.001 Notes: Health Canada Benzo(a)pyrene total potency equivalents 4.3.1.2 Oral Exposure Many agencies, including Health Canada (2004b), USEPA (1994), and Cal EPA (2005) base their carcinogenicity assessment of benzo(a)pyrene on an oral exposure study by Neal and Rigdon (1967) study. In this feeding study benzo(a)pyrene was given to mice at concentrations ranging from 0.001 to 0.25 mg/g in feed (duration of oral exposure: 98 to 197 days). No tumours were noted in controls or in several low dose groups. The incidence of stomach tumours (squamous cell papillomas and carcinomas) increased in groups treated with 40 to 250 ppm doses. From this study, Health Canada derived an oral slope factor of 2.3 (mg/kg -day) -l. The USEPA (1994) derived an oral slope factor of 7.3 (mg/kg -day)-' based on the geometric mean of four slope factors (ranging from 4.5 to 11.7 (mg/kg -day) -1 obtained from animal studies, including the study by Neal and Rigdon (1967). The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA, 2005) calculated an oral slope factor of 12 (mg/kg -day) -1 using on a linearized multistage procedure which incorporates a linear upper bound on extra risk for exposures below the experimental range when estimating carcinogenic risk. Given that the Neal and Rigdon (1967) study is the foundation for interpreting toxicity from oral exposure to benzo(a)pyrene and used by all agencies as a principal study, the more conservative Health Canada (2010) value of 2.3 (mg/kg -day) -1 was selected for use in this risk assessment. Design with community in mind Page a of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 51 Stantec 4.3.1.3 Inhalation Exposure APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles Health Canada (2012) provides an inhalation TRV for B(a)P based on a sub -chronic to chronic study by Thysson et al. (1981), in which hamsters were exposed nose -only to an aerosol of B(a)P. An increase in respiratory tract tumours were noted with B(a)P exposure. Using multistage modelling, a carcinogenic TRV of 0.13 (mg/kg -day) -1 was derived; this TRV was selected for use in the risk assessment. 4.4 BIOAVAILABILITY For this HHRH, the oral bioavailability factor for soil was conservatively assumed to be 1.0 (Health Canada, 2010). With regards to the inhalation pathway, it has been conservatively assumed that PAHs are completely absorbed (i.e. absorption factor is 1). As recommended by Health Canada (2010), a dermal bioavailability factor of 0.148 was adopted for this risk assessment. 4.5 SUMMARY The following tables present PAH TRVs selected for use in this risk assessment. Table 4 Selected Toxicity Reference Values for PAHs of Concern Table 5 Selected Relative Bioavailabilities for PAHs 4.6 REFERENCES ACGIH (American Conference of Industrial Hygienists). 2007. TLVs and BEIs Book. Abdo, K.M., Grumbein, S., Chou, B.J., et al. 2001. Toxicity and carcinogenicity study in F344 rats following 2 years of whole-body exposure to naphthalene vapors. Inhalation Toxicology, 13: 931-950. Cited In: ATSDR 2005. ATSDR. 1995. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Benzo(a)pyrene Available on-line at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp69.html ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry), 1996. ToxFAQs for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. September 1996. ATSDR. 2005. Toxicological Profile for Naphthalene 1 -Methylnaphthalene, and 2- Methylnaphthalene. US Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Atlanta, Georgia. Design with community in mind Page 12 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. tante APPENDIX D J Human Health Toxicity Profiles California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA). 2005. Technical Support Document for Describing Available Cancer Potency Values. California Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, Air Toxicology and Epidemiology Section. Available on-line at: http://www.oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/pdf/May2005Hotspots.pdf. Health Canada, 2010. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors, Version 2.0. September 2010. Health Canada. 2007. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part I: Guidance on Human Health Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment. Environmental Health Assessment Services, Safe Environments Programme (Draft). IARC, 2002. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) - Summaries & Evaluations: NAPHTHALENE. Vol. 82. p.367. Available online at: http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol82/82-06.html. IPCS, 1998. Environmental Health Criteria 202 - Selected Nin -Heterocyclic Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. World Health Organization (WHO). International Program on Chemical Safety. Lee, J -S, 2009. Personal Communication, Jong -Song Lee, Ph.D., Toxicology Section, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. MOE. 2008. Summary of O.REG. 419/05 Standards and Point of Impingement Guidelines & Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQCs). Standards Development Branch. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. National Toxicology Program (NTP). 1992. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of naphthalene in B6C3F1 mice (inhalation studies). Technical Report Series No. 410. NIH Publication No. 92-3141. Cited in: US EPA, 1998. National Toxicology Program (NTP). 2000. Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of naphthalene (CAS No. 91- 20-3) in F344/N rats (inhalation studies). National Toxicology Program. NTP TR 500, NIH Publ. No. 01-4434. Cited In: ATSDR 2005. Neal, J. and R.H. Rigdon. 1967. Gastric tumors in mice fed benzo[a]pyrene -- A quantitative study. Texas Reports on Biology and Medicine, 25(4): 553-557. Cited In: US EPA IRIS 1994. NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health). 2005. NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards. NIOSH Publication 2005-149. OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration). 1988. Permissible Exposure Limits http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/pel88/npelname.html RIVM. 2001. Re-evaluation of human -toxicological maximum permissible risk levels. Rijksinstituut Voor Volksgezondheid En Milieu. National Institute of Public Health and the Environment. RIVM report 711701 025. Published as: Baars et al. 2001 Szakolcai, A. 2009. Personal Communication, Akos Szakolcai. Coordinator, Air Standards Risk Management - Human Toxicology and Air Standards Section. Ontario Ministry of the Environment. TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) 2013. Effects Screening Levels. http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/implementation/tox/index.html. Design with community in mind Page 13 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles USEPA. 1989. Subchronic toxicity study in mice with anthracene. HLA Study No. 2399-131, Final Report. Prepared by Hazleton Laboratories America, Inc., Rockville, MD, for the Office of Solid Waste, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. USEPA 1990. IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System, Fluorene. Available on-line at: http://www.epa.gov/iris/. United States Environmental Protection Agency. USEPA 1993. IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System, Anthracene. Available on-line at: http://www.epa.gov/iris/. United States Environmental Protection Agency. USEPA, 1994. IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System, Benzo[a]pyrene. Available on-line at http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/0136.htm. USEPA 1998. IRIS - Integrated Risk Information System, Naphthalene. Available on-line at: http://www.epa.gov/iris/. United States Environmental Protection Agency. WHO (World Health Organization). 1998. International Programme on Chemical Safety. Environmental Health Criteria 202. Selected non -heterocyclic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Appendix I. Some approaches to risk assessment for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Prepared for the United Nations Environment Program WHO (World Health Organization). 2000. Air Quality Guidelines for Europe: Second Edition. WHO Regional Publications, European Series, No. 91. 5.0 Thallium Thallium is a metal found in trace amounts in the earth's crust. In the past, thallium was obtained as a by-product from smelting other metals; however, it has not been produced in the United States since 1984. Thallium is used mostly in the manufacturing of electronic devices, switches and closures, primarily for the semiconductor industry. It also has limited use in the manufacture of special glass for certain medical procedures (ATSDR, 1992). Exposure to high levels of thallium can result in harmful human health effects. Inhalation of thallium over several years has been shown to lead to nervous system effects such as numbness of the extremities. Ingestion of large amounts of thallium in a short period of time can lead to diarrhea, hair loss, nervous system effects, effects on the lungs, heart, liver and kidneys, and possible death. Effects from chronic ingestion of low levels of thallium are not known (ATSDR, 1992). Reproductive effects from thallium exposure have not been documented in humans. In animal studies, however, exposure of mothers to high levels of thallium resulted in adverse developmental effects. Animal studies also suggest that the male reproductive system may be susceptible to damage by low levels of thallium (ATSDR, 1992). 5.1 SUSCEPTIBLE POPULATIONS People with pre-existing kidney and/or liver damage, or people with a neurological disease may be more susceptible to the effects of exposure to thallium (ATSDR, 1992). Design with community in mind Page 14 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles 5.2 ASSESSMENT OF CARCINOGENICITY Health Canada, the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the USEPA have not classified thallium as to its human carcinogenicity. 5.3 SELECTION OF CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES Thallium is not classified as a carcinogenic substance; therefore, carcinogenic toxicological reference values have not been selected. 5.4 SELECTION OF NON -CARCINOGENIC TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES Numerous sources were consulted in order to obtain toxicity reference values. A summary of the reviewed studies and the TRVs selected for use in the HHRA are outlined below. 5.4.1 Oral Exposure Although withdrawn due to low overall confidence in the underlying study, the USEPA (2009) had previously derived an oral RfD of 0.00001 mg/kg -day based upon subchronic (90 -day) toxicity of thallium sulfate in Sprague -Dawley rats (MRI, 1988). Based on hair follicle atrophy in female rats, the high dose (0.2 mg/kg -day) was identified as a LOAEL and the mid dose (0.04 mg/kg -day) was considered a NOAEL. A total uncertainty factor of 3,000 (10 for interspecies extrapolation, 10 for intraspecies extrapolation, 3 for extrapolation from a subchronic to a chronic study and 10 for database deficiencies) was applied to the NOAEL to yield a candidate RfD value for thallium (in the form of soluble thallium salts) of 0.00001 mg/kg -day. ATSDR has also evaluated oral exposure to thallium, but due to a lack of data, did not derive a chronic oral TRV (ATSDR, 1992). In the absence of other reference doses, the withdrawn USEPA RfD value of 0.00001 mg/kg -day was selected as a chronic oral toxicity reference value for this assessment. 5.4.2 Inhalation Exposure 5.4.2.1.1 Acute Inhalation Toxicity Reference Values (1 -hour, 24-hour) A 1 -hour exposure limit of 1 pg/m3 for thallium was selected from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ, 2013). The TCEQ effects screening level (ESL) was derived from an American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value (TLV) of 100 pg/m3 based on alopecia. ACGIH values are occupational values; therefore, TCEQ further divided the TLV by a safety factor of 100 (i.e., 10 for extrapolation from workers to the general public; 10 for a difference in exposure time) to derive a 1 -hour exposure limit. A 24-hour inhalation TRV for thallium was not available. Design with community in mind Page 15 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. tar ten APPENDIX D •7 Human Health Toxicity Profiles 5.4.2.1.2 Chronic Inhalation Toxicity Reference Values An annual exposure limit of 0.1 pg/M3 for thallium was selected from TCEQ (2013). The TCEQ ESL selected was based on alopecia as outlined in the previous section. To derive a long-term ESL for thallium, TCEQ divided the short-term ESL by an additional safety factor of 10. ATSDR (1992) and the USEPA (2009) have also evaluated inhalation exposure to thallium, but due to a lack of data, did not derive chronic inhalation TRVs. The TCEQ value of 0.0001 mg/m3 was selected as a chronic inhalation toxicity reference value for this assessment. 5.5 BIOAVAILABILITY For this assessment, the oral bioavailability factor for soil can be conservatively assumed to be 1.0, in accordance with guidance from Health Canada (2010). The relative inhalation absorption factor for thallium has been conservatively assumed to be 1.0. In the case of dermal absorption of contaminants across the skin, the relative dermal absorption factor for thallium was set to a default of 1% or 0.01, as outlined by the USEPA (USEPA, 1995). 5.6 SUMMARY For thallium, Table 1 summarizes the selected toxicity reference values and Table 2 summarizes the selected relative bioavailabilities. Table 6 Selected Toxicity Reference Values for Thallium Non -Cancer Effects Ingestion 0.00001 mg/kg -day RfD USEPA (2009) Inhalation 0.0001 mg/m3 Benchmark TECQ (2013) Table 7 Selected Relative Bioavailabilities for Thallium 5.7 REFERENCES ACGIH (American Conference of Industrial Hygienists). 2007. TLVs and BEIs Book. ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry). 1992. Toxicological Profile for Thallium. September 1995 Design with community in mind Page 16 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles Health Canada, 2010. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part 11: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors, Version 2.0. September 2010. MRI (Midwest Research Institute). 1988. Toxicity of thallium (1) sulfate (CAS No. 7446-18-6) in Sprague -Dawley rats. Vol. 2. Subchronic (90 -day) study [revised final report]. Prepared by Dynamac Corporation, Rockville, MD, for the Office of Solid Waste, Washington, DC; Project No. 8702-L(18); Work Assignment No. 1 11148- 008. 1148- 008. TCEQ (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality). 2013. Effects Screening Levels. Available online at: http://www.tceq.texas.gov/toxicology/esl/list-main.html#esi-I. Last updated 2/1/2013. USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2009. Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) Database: Thallium(1) soluble salts; CASRN Various. USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. Assessing Dermal Exposure from Soil. Technical Guidance Manual. Hazardous Waste Management Division. December 2003. 6.0 Uranium Uranium is a naturally occurring, radioactive substance, most commonly found in the form of minerals. It naturally occurs as a mixture of three isotopes, but it is 235U that is useful as a fuel in power plants (US EPA IRIS). 6.1 SELECTION OF TOXICITY REFERENCE VALUES Numerous sources were consulted in order to obtain toxicological and benchmark values for COPCs. A summary of the reviewed studies and the TRVs selected for use in the HHRA are outlined below. 6.1.1 Oral Exposure 6.1.1.1 Non -Carcinogenic Toxicity Reference Values Health Canada (2010) provides a non -carcinogenic TRV for oral exposures to uranium of 0.0006 mg/kg -day. This value was derived from a sub -chronic drinking water study conducted on rats. The LOAEL for nephrotoxic and hepatotoxic health effects was 0.06 mg/kg -day, which was further divided by a safety factor of 100. In this risk assessment a non -carcinogenic TRV value of 0.0006 mg/kg -day was selected. 6.1.1.2 Carcinogenic Toxicity Reference Values Insufficient information is available to classify uranium as a carcinogenic substance; therefore, a carcinogenic oral TRV has not been selected. Design with community in mind Page 17 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles 6.1.2 Inhalation Exposure 6.1.2.1 Non -Carcinogenic Toxicity Reference Values Health Canada (2010) does not provide a non -carcinogenic TRV for inhalation exposures to uranium. ATSDR (2013) developed a minimal risk level of 0.0008 mg/m3 for uranium, based on chronic duration inhalation exposure to uranium dioxide in Rhesus monkeys. In the study conducted by Leach et al. (1970), monkeys were exposed by inhalation to 5.1 mg/m3 (as uranium dioxide) corresponding to a radioactivity concentration of 3.4 nCi/m3 (126 Bq/m3) for periods >3 years. Similarly exposed dogs also developed slight interstitial and vascular fibrosis of the lungs at lung following exposure to 5.1 mg U/m3 (Leach et al. 1970).The effect on the tracheobronchial lymph nodes in animals exposed for an additional 2 years ranged from involvement of a single node to complete destruction of all nodes, was dose-dependent and showed a similarity to changes seen after inhalation exposure to plutonium as 238Pu or 239Pu dioxide (Leach et al. 1973). Renal damage was not observed in either dogs or monkeys, but fibrosis was found in monkey lung and both necrosis and fibrosis were found in dog and monkey lymph nodes. It was not clear whether the damage was chemically or radiologically induced, but the magnitude of the radiation doses and the presence of lung and lymph node damage in the absence of renal effects was suggestive to the authors of long-term radiation damage (Leach et al. 1970). This value of 5.1 mg/m3 was used to derive a chronic -duration inhalation minimal risk level (MRL) of 0.0008 mg U/m3 for insoluble uranium compounds based on a LOAELADJ of 0.82 mg/m3 and an uncertainty factor of 1000 (10 for use of LOAEL, 10 for extrapolation from animals to humans and 10 for human variability). In this risk assessment a non -carcinogenic MRL value of 0.0008 mg/m3 was selected. 6.1.2.2 Carcinogenic Toxicity Reference Values Insufficient information is available to classify uranium as a carcinogenic substance; therefore, a carcinogenic inhalation TRV has not been selected. 6.2 BIOAVAILABILITY For this assessment, the oral bioavailability factor for soil can be conservatively assumed to be 1.0, in accordance with guidance from Health Canada (2010). The relative inhalation absorption factor for manganese has been conservatively assumed to be 1.0. 6.3 CONCLUSION For uranium, Table 9 summarizes the selected toxicity reference values and Table 10 summarizes the selected relative bioavailabilities. Design with community in mind Page 18 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. (30 Stantec Table 8 Selected Toxicity Reference Values for Uranium APPENDIX D Human Health Toxicity Profiles Table 9 Selected Relative Bioavailabilities for Uranium W Route of Exposure WW Relative Bioavailability Reference Ingestion 1.0 Assumed (HC, 2010) Non -Cancer Effects Ingestion 6E-04 (mg/kg -day)-' TDI Health Canada, 2010 Inhalation 8E-04 mg/m3 MRL ATSDR, 2013 Table 9 Selected Relative Bioavailabilities for Uranium W Route of Exposure WW Relative Bioavailability Reference Ingestion 1.0 Assumed (HC, 2010) Inhalation 1.0 Assumed (HC, 2010) Dermal 0.1 Health Canada, 2010 6.4 REFERENCES ATSDR. 2013. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, chronic Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs). Available at: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/mrls/index.asp Health Canada, 2010. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors. September 2010. Design with community in mind Page 19 of 19 Stantec Consulting Ltd. SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix E HHRA Inputs and Calculations September 11, 2015 A nnendix t HHRA Inputs and Calculations ® Stantec E.1 Stantec Table of Contents APPENDIX E Example Human Health Calculation 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................. 2 2.0 NON -CARCINOGENIC EXPOSURE TO COBALT IN SURFACE WATER& FISH....................................................................................3 2.1 ESTIMATION OF DAILY DOSE FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR ................................................... 3 2.2 ESTIMATION OF HAZARD QUOTIENT FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR ...................................... 4 3.0 CARCINOGENIC EXPOSURE TO B(A)P IN SURFACE WATER & FISH...................................................................................................5 3.1 ESTIMATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSE FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR ................................ 5 3.2 ESTIMATION OF CANCER RISK FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR ................................................ 6 4.0 REFERENCES......................................................................................6 Page 1 of 5 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. APPENDIX E S l} .a ntec Example Human Health Calculation 1.0 Introduction The first part of this Appendix serves to assist the reader in understanding how the quantitative HHRA was conducted by providing example calculations using data from the Site. This worked example will progress from the exposure assessment through to the risk characterization stage. This example calculation focuses on non -carcinogenic exposure to cobalt and carcinogenic exposure to benzo(a)pyrene. Receptor characteristics were obtained from Health Canada (2010a), unless otherwise noted. These characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Although exposure times and durations are usually based on Health Canada guidance (2010a) or Site specific information, as noted in this HHRA, exposure was conservatively assumed to be 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, over the course of one year for the current land use. Table 1 Human Receptor Characteristics .. - - Visitor >_ 20 yr. Age Years Age Group Duration Years 60 Body Weight Kg 70.7 Inadvertent Water Ingestion b L/event 0.021 Skin Surface Area Hands Arms (upper and lower) Legs (upper and lower) Body (arms+legs) Total Body c m' 890 2,500 5,720 8,220 17,640 Hours per event hours/ event 1,5 Hours per day on Site hours/ day 1.5 Days per week on Site days/ week 7 Weeks per year on Site weeks/ year 39 Total Years Exposed Years 60 Life Expectancy Years 80 Food Ingestion Rate Fish c kg/day 0.1 1 1 Days per year fish consumed d Days 21 Notes: Human receptor characteristics obtained from Health Canada (2010a). b Values from USEPA "Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition", based on Dufour et al., (2006). c Values from Richardson (1997). d Values from Statistics Canada "Fish caught and kept by resident anglers, 2005" (2008). Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/1 6-002-x/2008002/t/5212690-eng.htm Page 2 of 7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. APPENDIX E Stantec Example Human Health Calculation 2.0 Non -Carcinogenic Exposure to Cobalt in Surface Water & Fish 2.1 ESTIMATION OF DAILY DOSE FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR To quantify the potential risk to an Adult Site Visitor as a result of exposure to cobalt due to inadvertent ingestion and dermal contact with surface water, and ingestion of fish, an estimated daily dose from each applicable exposure pathway was estimated as defined below: Where: And: Where: SW Oral Dose = (Cwater x AFgut x IRwater X D2 X D3) / BW SW Dermal Dose = ((Cwater X Kpskin X tevent) X SA X D2 X Ds) / BW Fish Consumption Oral Dose = (X(Cfaadi X IRfaadi x AFgat x Dfaadi) / (BW x 365) Cwater Exposure Point Concentration of COPC in soil (mg/kg) AF Relative absorption factor for gut, skin, or lungs (unitless) IRwater Water inadvertent intake rate (L/day) Kpskln Dermal permeability coefficient of compound in water (cm/hr) tevent Event duration (hr/event) Di Hours per day exposed / 24 hours D2 Days per week exposed / 7 days Ds Weeks per year exposed / 52 weeks BW Body Weight (kg) I Rwater = I I Rwater X tevent IIRwater Inadvertent water intake rate (L/event) tevent Event duration (hr/event) Other factors used in the calculations are shown in Table 2. Table 2 Other Factors Used in Direct Contact Exposure Calculations Calculation of cobalt doses for all direct contact exposure pathways applicable to the Adult Site Visitor are shown below: Page 3 of 7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Cwater Concentration of COC in water mg/L 0.00025 AFg�t Absorption factor for the gut unitless 1 Kpskln Dermal permeability coefficient in water cm/hr 0.0004 Calculation of cobalt doses for all direct contact exposure pathways applicable to the Adult Site Visitor are shown below: Page 3 of 7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX E Example Human Health Calculation SW Oral Dose = (Cwater x AFgut x IRwater x D2 x D3) / BW SW Dermal Dose = ((Cwater x Kpskin x tevent) x SA x D2 x D3) / BW Fish Oral Dose = (X(Ctoodi x IRtoodi x AFgut x Dtoodi) / (BW x 365) SW Oral Dose = (Cwater x AFgut x IRwater x D2 x D3) / BW SW Oral Dose = 0.00025 x 1 x (0.021 x 1.5) x (7/7) x (39/52)) / 70.7 SW Oral Dose = 8.35E-08 mg/kg-bw-day SW Dermal Dose = ((Cwater x Kpskin x tevent) x SA x D2 x D3) / BW SW Dermal Dose = ((0.00025/ 1000 x 0.0004 x 1.5) x 17640 x (7/7) x (39/52)) / 70.7 SW Dermal Dose = 2.81E-08 mg/kg-bw-day Fish Oral Dose = (X(Ctoodi x IRtoodi x AFgut x Dtoodi) / BW x 365 Fish Oral Dose = (0.012 x 0.1 1 1 x 1 x 21) / (70.7 x 365) Fish Oral Dose = 1.08E-06 mg/kg-bw-day 2.2 ESTIMATION OF HAZARD QUOTIENT FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR In the final step of risk characterization, the daily doses are compared to the selected TRVs for cobalt to estimate the Hazard Quotients (HQs). In this assessment, an oral TRV of 1.4x10-3 mg/kg - day was utilized as directed by Health Canada (2010b), to determine the oral+dermal HQ. Estimation of the Oral+Dermal HQ for the Adult Site Visitor exposed to cobalt in water is thus: Oral+Dermal HQ = Oral+Dermal Dose / Oral TRV Oral+Dermal HQ = (8.35E-08 + 2.81 E-08) mg/kg-bw-day / 1.4x10-3 mg/kg-bw-day Oral+Dermal HQ = 7.97E-05 Estimation of the Oral Ingestion HQ for the Adult Site Visitor exposed to cobalt from fish is thus: Oral HQ = Fish Oral Dose / Oral TRV Oral HQ = 1.08E-06 mg/kg-bw-day / 1.4x10-3 mg/kg-bw-day Oral HQ = 7.74E-04 Page 4 of 7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX E Example Human Health Calculation Estimation of the Total Oral+Dermal Ingestion HQ for the Adult Site Visitor is thus: Total Oral+Dermal HQ = Total Oral+Dermal HQ = Total Oral+Dermal HQ = Oral+Dermal HQ + Oral HQ 7.97E-05 + 7.74E-04 8.54E-04 3.0 Carcinogenic Exposure to B(a)P in Surface Water & Fish 3.1 ESTIMATION OF AVERAGE DAILY DOSE FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR To quantify the potential cancer risk to an Adult Site Visitor as a result of exposure to B(a)P concentrations due to an estimated average daily dose from each applicable exposure pathway was estimated as defined below: SW Oral Dose = (Cwater X AFgut x IRwater X D2 X D3 X D4) / (BW X LE) SW Dermal Dose = ((Cwater X Kpskin X tevent) x SA X D2 x D3 x D4) / (BW X LE) Fish Consumption Oral Dose = (I(Ctoodi x IRtoodi x AFgut x Dfoodi) x D4) / (BW x 365 x LE) Factors used in the calculations are shown in Table 2, and in Section 2.1 above. A Kpskin value of 0.713 cm/hr was used (RAIS, 2013). Calculation of b(a)p doses for all direct contact exposure pathways applicable to Adult Site Visitor are shown below: SW Oral Dose = (Cwater x AFgut x IRwater x D2 x D3) / (BW x LE) SW Oral Dose = 0.00015 x 1 x (0.021 x 1.5) x (7/7) x (39/52) x 60) / (70.7 x 80) SW Oral Dose = 3.76E-08 mg/kg-bw-day SW Dermal Dose = ((Cwater x Kpskin x tevenr) x SA x D2 x D3) / (BW x LE) SW Dermal Dose = ((0.000015/1000 x 0.713 x 1.5) x 17640 x (7/7) x (39/52) x 60) / (70.7 x 80) SW Dermal Dose = 2.25E-06 mg/kg-bw-day Fish Oral Dose = (Y(Ctoodi x IRtoodi x AFgut x Dtoodi) / (BW x 365 x LE) Fish Oral Dose = (0.075 x 0.1 1 1 x 1 x 21 x 60) /( 70.7 x 365 x 80) Page 5 of 7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. APPENDIX E Stantec Example Human Health Calculation Fish Oral Dose = 5.08E-06 mg/kg-bw-day 3.2 ESTIMATION OF CANCER RISK FOR ADULT SITE VISITOR In this assessment, an oral carcinogenic slope factor (SF) of 2.3 (mg/kg -day) -1 was utilized as directed by Health Canada (2010). Estimation of the Oral+Dermal CR for the Adult Site Visitor exposed to B(a)P is thus: Oral+Dermal CR = Oral+Dermal Dose x Oral SF Oral+Dermal CR = (3.76E-08 + 2.25E-06) mg/kg-bw-day x 2.3 (mg/kg-bw-day)-1 Oral+Dermal CR = 5.19E-06 Estimation of the Oral Ingestion CR for the Adult Site Visitor exposed to B(a)P from fish is thus: Oral CR = Fish Oral Dose x Oral SF Oral CR = 5.08E-06 mg/kg-bw-day x 2.3 (mg/kg-bw-day)-1 Oral CR = 1.17E-05 Estimation of the Total Oral+Dermal CR for the Adult Site Visitor is thus: Total Oral+Dermal CR = Oral+Dermal HQ + Oral HQ Total Oral+Dermal CR = 5.19E-06 + 1.17E-05 Total Oral+Dermal CR = 1.69E-05 4.0 References Health Canada, 2010a. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part I: Guidance on Human Health Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PARA). September 2010. Revised 2012. Health Canada, 2010b. Federal Contaminated Site Risk Assessment in Canada, Part II: Health Canada Toxicological Reference Values (TRVs) and Chemical -Specific Factors. September 2010. Statistics Canada. 2008. Fish caught and kept by resident anglers, 2005. Available from: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/1 6-002-x/2008002/t/5212690-eng.htm USEPA. 2011. Exposure Factors Handbook: 2011 Edition. National Center. Page 6 of 7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. APPENDIX E Stantec Example Human Health Calculation PORT BURWELL TODDLER SITE VISITOR Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Human Health Risk Assessment Surface Water Ingestion Toddler Site Visitor Receptor: Health Canada :7DI►�il Toddler Commerical Oral Dose CW x AFgut x IRWater x ETing Dermal Dose (Cw x Kpskin x (event) x SA x Etderm = = BW x LE (carc only) BW x LE (carc only) Parameter TDI = SF = CW= tevent = Time on site: Hours per day 1.5 Days per Week 7 Weeks per Year 39 Lifetime Exposure 60 Definition (units) reference dose (mg/kg bw-day) slope factor (mg/kg bw-day)-1 concentration in water (mg/L) event duration (hr/event) Default Value Reference chemical specific chemical specific site specific calculated Exposure Point Concentration (EPC) 1.5 Site Specific BW = body weight (kg) 16.5 Health Canada (2010) -Toddler AF gut= absorption factor for gut (unitless) chemical specific Assumed KP skin = dermal permeability coefficient of compound in water (cm/hr) chemical specific USEPA (2004); or default Health Canada (2010) IR WOfer = water inadvertent intake rate (L/day) 0.0735 Health Canada (2010) -Toddler ET ;n9 = exposure term for inadvertent ingestion pathway (unitless) 0.7500 Site Specific [7 Days per Week, 39 Weeks per Year] ET Berm = exposure term for surface water dermal contact pathway (unitless) 0.7500 Site Specific [7 Days per Week, 39 Weeks per Year] SA body = skin surface area - body (cm2) 6130 Health Canada (2010) -Toddler Human Health Risk Assessment Food Ingestion Toddler Site Visitor Receptor: Health Canada RIVM PPRTV Toddler Commerical (Cfoodi x I Rfoodi x Afgut x Dfoodi) ) x D4 (carc only) Oral Dosefoadi = BW x 365 x LE (carc only) Parameter Definition (units) Default Value Reference TDI = reference dose (mg/kg bw-day) chemical specific SF = slope factor (mg/kg bw-day)-f chemical specific C S = concentration in soil (mg/kg) site specific calculated Exposure Point Concentration (EPC) SAF = soil allocation factor (unitless) chemical specific BW = body weight (kg) 16.5 Health Canada (2010) -Toddler BSC = background soil concentration (mg/kg) chemical specific Health Canada (2010) -Toddler AF gut = absorption factor for gut (unitless) chemical specific Assumed IR fish = fish ingestion rate (kg/day) 0.056 Health Canada (2010) -Toddler D ; = days per year fish will be ingested (day) 21 Site Specific [ number of days assumed to be on -Site ] APPENDIX E Stantec Example Human Health Calculation PORT BURWELL ADULT SITE VISITOR Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Human Health Risk Assessment Surface Water Ingestion Adult Site Visitor Receptor: Adult Health Canada RIMILM Commerical Oral Dose Cw x AFgut x I Rwater x ETing Dermal Dose (Cw x Kpskin x (event) x SA x Etderm = = BW x LE (carc only) BW x LE (carc only) Parameter Time on site: Hours per day 1.5 Days per Week 7 Weeks per Year 39 Lifetime Exposure 60 Definition (units) TDI = reference dose (mg/kg bw-da SF = slope factor (mg/kg bw-day)-1 c W = concentration in water (mq/L) tevent = event duration (hr/event) Default Value chemical specific Reference chemical specific site specific calculated Exposure Point Concentration (EPC) 1.5 Site Specific BW = body weight (kg) 70.7 Health Canada (2010) - Adult AF gut= absorption factor for gut (unitless) chemical specific Assumed Kp skin = dermal permeability coefficient of compound in water (cm/hr) chemical specific USEPA (2004); or default Health Canada (2010) IR Water = water inadvertent intake rate (L/day) 0.0315 Health Canada (2010) - Adult ET ina = ET derm = SA body = exposure term for inadvertent ingestion pathway (unitless) 0.7500 Site Specific [7 Days per Week, 39 Weeks per Year] exposure term for surface water dermal contact pathway (unitless) 0.7500 Site Specific [7 Days per Week, 39 Weeks per Year] skin surface area - body (cm2) 17640 Health Canada (2010) - Adult Human Health Risk Assessment Food Ingestion Adult Site Visitor Receptor: Health Canada RIVM PPRTV Adult Commerical (Cfoodi x I Rfoodi x Afgut x Dfoodi) ) x D4 (carc only) Oral Dosefoadi = BW x 365 x LE (carc only) Parameter Definition (units) TDI = reference dose (mg/kg bw-day) SF = slope factor (mg/kg bw-day)-1 C S = concentration in soil (mg/kg) Default Value Reference chemical specific chemical specific site specific calculated Exposure Point Concentration (EPC) SAF = soil allocation factor (unitless) chemical specific BW = body weight (kg) 70.7 Health Canada (2010) -Adult BSC = background soil concentration (mg/kg) chemical specific Health Canada (2010) - Adult AF gut = absorption factor for gut (unitless) chemical specific Assumed IR fish = fish ingestion rate (kg/day) 0.111 Health Canada (2010) - Adult D i = days per year fish will be ingested (day) 21 Site Specific [ number of days assumed to be on -Site ] SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix F Ecological Health Screening September 11, 2015 Appendix's Ecological Health Screening ® Stantec F.1 Table F-1 Ecological Health Screening of Sediment Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell Sediment Concentration ML.Parameter Background Sediment a Federal MOEC ical i all b c Forward? Rationale . General Chemistry Concentration Guideline Guideline . Ammonia (as N) 252 N <25 NG NG No sediment guideline Chloride 35 <20 NG NG N No sediment guideline Fluoride 5 <5 NG NG N No sediment guideline Nitrate (as N) 4 <2 NG NG N No sediment guideline Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) 4 <3 NG NG N No sediment guideline Nitrite (as N) <0.5 <0.5 NG NG N Site:5 background and no guideline pH 7.09-7.75 7.70-7.72 NG NG N No sediment guideline Sulfate 71 <20 NG NG N No sediment guideline Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 1490 136 NG 5504 N See text Total Organic Carbon 14000 8200 NG 100001 N See text Petroleum Hydrocarbons + BTEX Benzene <0.005 <0.005 1.7e NG N Site < guideline and < background Toluene 0.1 <0.02 2,0e NG N Site < guideline and15 background Ethylbenzene <0.01 <0.01 1 ,6e NG N Site < guideline and:5 background Xylene, m & p <0.04 <0.04 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Xylene, o <0.02 <0.02 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Xylenes, Total <0.04 <0.04 1.8e NG N Site < guideline and < background PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) <10 <10 21e NG N Site < guideline and < background PHC F1 (C6C10 range) minus BTEX <10 <10 21e NG N Site < guideline and < background PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) 19(<20) <10 35e NG N Site < guideline PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) 180 <50 60e NG N See text PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) 40(<50) <50 NG NG N No sediment guideline and only 1 location had a detectable concentration (within 5 -fold of the detection limit)' Metals Aluminum 7600 1300 25500f NG N Site < guideline Antimony 0.21 <0.20 0.63' NG N Site < guideline Arsenic 3.6 1.7 5.9 6 N Site < guideline Barium 57 9 130f NG N Site < guideline Beryllium 0.45 <0.20 NG NG N No sediment guideline and all detectable concentrations within 5 -fold of the detection limit Bismuth <1.0 <1.0 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Boron <5.0 <5.0 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Boron (Available) 0.39 <0.05 NG 1.5c' N Site < guideline Cadmium 0.2 <0.10 0.6 0.6 N Site < guideline Calcium 85000 82000 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Chromium (Hexavalent) <0.2 <0.2 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Chromium (Total) 15 8.2 37.3 26 N Site < guideline Cobalt 6.8 2.7 NG 50 N Site < guideline Copper 18 4.8 35.7 16 N Site < guideline Iron 16000 5000 NG 200001 N Site < guideline Lead 14 4 35 31 N Site < guideline Lithium 14 3 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Magnesium 19000 14000 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Manganese 630 230 NG 4601 Y Site > background and > guideline Mercury <0.05 <0.050 0.17 0.2 N Site < guideline and < background Molybdenum <0.5 <0.50 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Nickel 15 4 NG 16 N Site < guideline Phosphorus 960 850 NG 6001 N Site background Potassium 750 <200 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Selenium <0.5 <0.50 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Silver <0.2 <0.20 NG 0.5 N Site < guideline and:5 background Sodium 120 <100 NG NG N No sediment guideline and all detectable concentrations within 5 -fold of the detection limit' Strontium 120 96 NG NG N No sediment guideline and Site marginally above background; see text Sulfur 1000 310 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Thallium 0.11 <0.050 NG NG N No sediment guideline and all detectable concentrations within 5 -fold of the detection limit' Tin <5.0 <5.0 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Titanium 268 268 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Tungsten <1 <1 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Uranium 0.49 0.58 NG NG N Site <background and no guideline Vanadium 23 28 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline Zinc 62 19.0 123 120 N Site < guideline Zirconium 5 1 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene <0.01 <0.0050 0.00671 NG N All Site samples below detection limits (two samples with elevated detection limits above the guideline) Acenaphthylene 0.0083(<0.01) <0.0050 0.00587 NG Y Site > background and > guideline Anthracene 0.013 <0.0050 0.0469 0.22 N Site < guideline Benzo(a)anthracene 0.045 <0.0050 0.0317 0.32 Y Site > background and > guideline Benzo(a)pyrene 0.042 <0.0050 0.0319 0.37 Y Site > background and > guideline Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 0.067 <0.0050 NG 0.24c2 N Site < guideline Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 0.033 <0.0050 NG 0.17 N Site < guideline Benzo(k)fluoranthene 0.023 <0.0050 NG 0.24 N Site < guideline Chrysene 0.043 <0.0050 0.0571 0.34 N Site < guideline Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene 0.0071 <0.01 <0.0050 0.00622 0.06 Y Site > background and > guideline Fluoranthene 0.1 <0.0050 0.1 1 1 0.75 N Site < guideline Fluorene 0.0093(<0.01) <0.0050 0.0212 0.19 N Site < guideline Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0.037 <0.0050 NG 0.2 N Site < guideline Methylnaphthalene (Total) 0.0176 <0.0071 NG NG N Site < guideline for 2 -methylnaphthalene Methylnaphthalene, 1- 0.011 <0.0050 NG NG N Site < guideline for 2 -methylnaphthalene Methylnaphthalene, 2- 0.01 <0.0050 0.0202 NG N Site < guideline Naphthalene <0.01 <0.0050 0.0346 NG N Site < guideline Phenanthrene 0.066 <0.0050 0.0419 0.56 Y Site > background and > guideline Pyrene 0.086 <0.0050 0.053 0.49 Y Site > background and > guideline Total PAH 0.5129 <0.0050 NG 41 N Site < guideline Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 <0.023 <0.015 0.0071 N NG Site <background Aroclor 1221 <0.023 <0.015 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1232 <0.023 <0.015 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1242 <0.023 <0.015 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1248 <0.023 <0.015 NG 0.031 N Site < guideline Aroclor 1254 <0.023 <0.015 0.06 0.061 N Site < guideline Aroclor 1260 <0.023 <0.015 NG 0.0051 N Site15 background (two samples with elevated detection limits) Aroclor 1262 <0.023 <0.015 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1268 <0.023 <0.015 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) <0.023 <0.015 0.0341 0.07 N Site < guideline Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin <0.003 <0.0020 NG 0.002 N Site < background (two samples with elevated detection limits) Aldrin + Dieldrin <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline BHC, alpha- <0.003 <0.0020 NG 0.0061 N Site < guideline and:5 background BHC, beta- <0.003 <0.0020 NG 0.0051 N Site < guideline and:5 background BHC, delta- <0.003 <0.0020 NG 0.0031 N Site < guideline and:5 background Chlordane (Total) 0.002(<0.003) <0.0020 0.0045 0.007 N Site < guideline Chlordane, alpha- <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Chlordane, gamma- 0.002(<0.003) <0.0020 NG NG N Site15 background and no guideline (two samples with elevated detection limits) DDD, o,p'- 0.008 <0.0020 0.00354 NG Y Site > background and > guideline DDD (p,p'-DDD) 0.022 <0.0020 0.00354 0.0081 Y Site > background and > guideline DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- 0.03 <0.0020 0.00354 0.008 Y Site > background and > guideline DDE, o,p'- <0.003 <0.0020 0.00142 NG Y Detection limit above guideline; all DDE congeners are carried forward DDE (p,p'-DDE) 0.035 <0.0020 0.00142 0.0051 Y Site > background and > guideline DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- 0.035 <0.0020 0.00142 0.005 Y Site > background and > guideline DDT, o,p'- <0.003 <0.0020 0.00119 NG Y Detection limit above guideline; all DDT congeners are carried forward DDT (p,p'-DDT) 0.006 <0.0020 0.00119 NG Y Site > background and > guideline DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- 0.006 <0.0020 0.00119 0.0081 Y Site > background and > guideline DDT + Metabolites 0.07 <0.0020 0.00119 NG Y Site > background and > guideline DDT Total 0.07 <0.0020 0.00119 0.007 Y Site > background and > guideline Dieldrin <0.003 <0.0020 0.00285 0.002 N Site15 background (two samples with elevated detection limits) Endosulfan <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endosulfan 1 <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endosulfan 11 <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endosulfan Sulfate <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endrin <0.003 <0.0020 0.00267 0.003 N Site15 background (two samples with elevated detection limits) Endrin Aldehyde <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endrin Ketone <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Heptachlor <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Heptachlor Epoxide <0.003 <0.0020 0.0006 0.005 N Site15 background (two samples with elevated detection limits) Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide <0.003 <0.0020 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Hexachlorobenzene <0.003 <0.0020 NG 0.02 N Site15 background (two samples with elevated detection limits) Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) <0.0075 <0.0050 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.0075 <0.0050 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Hexachloroethane <0.0075 <0.0050 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) <0.003 <0.0020 0.00094 NG N Site15 background and no guideline (two samples with elevated detection limits) Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) <0.0075 <0.0050 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Mirex <0.003 <0.0020 NG 0.0071 N Site < guideline and:5 background Octachlorostyrene <0.005 <0.0050 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Camphechlor (Toxaphene) I <0.12 1 <0.080 1 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Notes < = reported detection limit - = not analyzed NG = no guideline available NA = not applicable; no guideline available for comparison 'Maximum background concentration. "CCME Canadian Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life; freshwater interim sediment quality guidelines (ISQG). `MOECC Site Condition Standards. Table 9 - Sediment Components for Within 30m of a Water Body. c'Value for hot water soluble boron guideline for soil used as a surrogate since this value is designed for the protection of plants and invertebrates. 10MOE Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach, May 2008; lowest effect level (LEL). eAtlantic Risk -Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Version 3.0; chronic narcosis -based sediment toxicity benchmarks; adjusted for a sediment TOC = 1.4. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Screening Quick Reference Tables; freshwater sediment, most conservative value; marine value adopted if freshwater value unavailable. 'Presented for information purposes only. However, if there was no applicable federal guideline, the MOECC guideline was used to screen the parameter. 'Due to the absence of an ecological -based guideline and the fact that detectable concentrations are within 5 -fold of the detection limit, it is not likely that the substance poses an unacceptable risk to receptors at the Site. Grey highlighting indicates chemical exceeds the applicable guideline and is carried forward in the ERA. Stantec Table F-2 Ecological Health Screening of Surface Water Analytical Results SSRA of Sediment - Port Burwell 11111111111111111F 1W 11W Surface Water Parameter Maximum Site Concentration WWI Background Federal MOECC Surface Water Ecological Ecological Carried Rationale Concentration Guideline b Guideline c Forward? (pg/L) General Chemistry (pg/L) (pg/L) (pg/L) As Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 620 650 NG NG N Site < background and no guideline Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene <0.20 <0.20 370 460 N Site < guideline Toluene 0.53 <0.20 2 1400 N Site < guideline Ethylbenzene <0.20 <0.20 90 181 N Site < guideline Xylene, m & p- 0.24 <0.20 NG NG N No guideline and only 1 location had a detectable concentration (< guideline for total Xylenes). Xylene, o- <0.40 <0.40 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Xylenes, Total 0.24(<0.40) <0.40 NG 330 N Site < guideline PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) <25 <25 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX <25 <25 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) <100 <100 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) <200 <200 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) <200 <200 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Metals Aluminum 710 792 5 NG N Site < background Antimony <0.50 <0.5 NG 1600 N Site < guideline Arsenic 0.8 0.69 5 150 N Site < guideline Barium 49.6 44.2 NG 2300 N Site < guideline Beryllium <0.10 <0.10 NG 5.3 N Site < guideline Bismuth <1.0 <1.0 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Boron <50 <50 1500 3550 N Site < guideline Cadmium 0.016 0.014 0.09 0.21 N Site < guideline Calcium 90900 50.1 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Chromium (Hexavalent) <0.50 <0.50 1 11 N Site < guideline Chromium (Total) <1.0 <1.0 NG 64 N Site < guideline Cobalt <0.50 <0.50 NG 5 N Site < guideline Copper 2.09 2.48 2 7 N Site < background Iron 762 968 1000d NG N Site < guideline Lead 0.57 0.8 1 2 N Site < guideline Lithium <5.0 <5.0 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Magnesium 18000 1 1 100 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Manganese 72.4 58.5 700 NG N Site < guideline Mercury <0.01 <0.01 0.026 0.77 N Site < guideline Molybdenum <1.0 1.1 73 730 N Site < guideline Nickel 1.4 1.6 25 39 N Site < guideline Phosphorus 48 40 NG NG N Only 1 background sample analyzed; no guideline and mean of Site < the 1 background sample Potassium 2770 2.53 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Selenium 0.22 0.21 1 5 N Site < guideline Silicon 5140 1860 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Silver <0.020 <0.020 0.1 0.12 N Site < guideline Sodium 58700 11.2 NG 180000 N Site < guideline Strontium 329 212 1500e NG N Site < guideline Sulfur 14600 11.6 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Thallium <0.050 <0.050 0.8 40 N Site < guideline Tin <5.0 <5.0 73° NG N Site < guideline Titanium 42.7 26.2 NG NG N Parameter considered non-toxic; see text Uranium 0.84 0.73 15 33 N Site < guideline Vanadium <5.0 <5.0 NG 20 N Site < guideline Zinc 46.2 9.3 30 89 Y Site > background and > guideline Zirconium <0.50 <0.50 17e NG N Site < guideline Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene <0.010 <0.010 5.8 520 N Site < guideline Acenaphthylene <0.010 <0.010 NG 0.14 N Site < guideline Anthracene <0.010 <0.010 0.012 0.1 N Site < guideline Benzo(a)anthracene 0.013 <0.010 0.018 0.18 N Site < guideline Benzo(a)pyrene 0.015 <0.010 0.015 0.21 N Site < guideline Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 0.02 <0.010 NG 0.42 N Site < guideline Benzo(g,h,i)perylene <0.010 <0.010 NG 0.02 N Site < guideline Benzo(k)fluoranthene <0.010 <0.010 NG 0.14 N Site < guideline Chrysene 0.014 <0.010 NG 0.07 N Site < guideline Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene <0.010 <0.010 NG 0.04 N Site < guideline Fluoranthene 0.014 <0.010 0.04 7.3 N Site < guideline Fluorene <0.010 <0.010 3 29 N Site < guideline Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene <0.010 <0.010 NG 0.14 N Site < guideline Methylnaphthalene, 1- <0.010 <0.010 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Methylnaphthalene, 2- 0.011 <0.010 NG 146 N Site < guideline Naphthalene 0.015 <0.010 1.1 620 N Site < guideline Phenanthrene <0.010 <0.010 0.4 38 N Site < guideline Pyrene 0.013 <0.010 0.025 0.57 N Site < guideline Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1221 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1232 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1242 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1248 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1254 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1260 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1262 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Aroclor 1268 <0.05 <0.05 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) <0.05 <0.05 NG 0.014 N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin <0.005 <0.003 NG 0.3 N Site < guideline Aldrin + Dieldrin <0.005 <0.005 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline BHC, alpha- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline BHC, beta- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline BHC, delta- <0.005 <0.003 141 e NG N Site < guideline Chlordane (Total) <0.005 <0.005 NG 0.0043 N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Chlordane, alpha- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Chlordane, gamma- <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDD, o,p'- <0.005 <0.001 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDD (p,p'-DDD) <0.005 <0.001 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- <0.005 <0.005 NG 0.18 N Site < guideline DDE, o,p'- <0.005 <0.001 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDE (p,p'-DDE) <0.005 <0.001 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- <0.005 <0.005 NG 1.66 N Site < guideline DDT, o,p'- <0.005 <0.001 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDT (p,p'-DDT) <0.005 <0.001 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- <0.005 <0.005 NG 0.001 N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect DDT+ Metabolites <0.005 <0.005 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Dieldrin <0.005 <0.003 NG 0.056 N Site < guideline Endosulfan 1 <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endosulfan II <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endosulfan Sulfate <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endosulfan <0.005 <0.005 0.003 0.056 N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Endrin <0.005 <0.005 NG 0.036 N Site < guideline Endrin Aldehyde <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Endrin Ketone <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Heptachlor <0.005 <0.003 NG 0.0038 N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Heptachlor Epoxide <0.005 <0.003 NG 0.0038 N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide <0.005 <0.005 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Hexachlorobenzene <0.005 <0.003 NG 23 N Site < guideline Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) <0.009 <0.004 1.3 9.3 N Site < guideline Hexachlorocyclopentadiene <0.02 <0.01 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Hexachloroethane <0.01 <0.003 NG 540 N Site < guideline Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) <0.003 <0.003 NG 0.095 N Site < guideline Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) <0.01 <0.003 NG 0.03 N Site < guideline Mirex <0.005 <0.003 0.001 e NG N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Octachlorostyrene <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Oxychlordane <0.005 <0.003 NG NG N All values non -detect and no guideline Toxaphene <0.02 <0.2 0.0002e NG N Although the detection limit exceeds the guideline, all samples (including background) are non -detect Notes < = reported detection limit NG = no guideline available NA = not applicable; no guideline available for comparison "Maximum background concentration. `MOECC Aquatic Protection Values (APVs). dIn the absence of applicable federal or MOECC guidelines, the BC Approved Water Quality Guidelines for the protection of aquatic life were used for screening purposes. eln the absence of applicable federal or MOECC guidelines, the USEPA Region 3 Freshwater Screening Benchmarks were used for screening purposes. 'Presented for information purposes only. However, if there was no applicable federal guideline, the MOECC guideline was used to screen the parameter. Grey highlighting indicates chemical exceeds the applicable guideline and is carried forward in the ERA. (3 Sta ntec SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix G VEC Profiles September 11, 2015 Appendix G VEC Profiles ® Stantec G.1 Stantec 1.0 VEC PROFILES APPENDIX G VEC Profiles For the purpose of ecological risk assessment (ERA), it is not practical, nor necessary, to individually assess each wildlife species that may potentially visit or occupy the Site. Instead, the potential adverse effects imposed on a carefully selected subset of wildlife receptors referred to as Valued Ecological Components (VECs) exposed to COPCs at the Site were evaluated. The semi -aquatic mammalian and avian ecological receptors selected for the ERA are briefly described in the following sections. Where available, VEC characteristics (e.g., body weight, food and water ingestion rates) were obtained from the Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance (Environment Canada, 2012). For the purposes of the ERA of the aquatic environment at Port Burwell, it was conservatively assumed that all exposure resulted from the aquatic environment at the Site (i.e., from surface water and sediment). 1.1 Mallard Duck The mallard duck (Anas platyrhynchos) is found throughout Europe, Asia, and western and central North America (although generally not found in northern Quebec, Labrador, Newfoundland or the Maritime provinces). Mallard ducks nest near woodland lakes and streams, or in freshwater and tidal marshes, and adapt well to human activity in urban areas. The mallard duck weighs approximately 1.2 kg and has a foraging range size that varies from 9.2 ha to 240 ha. The mallard duck feeds primarily on aquatic invertebrates as ducklings and as adults during the breeding season, and on plants during the nonbreeding season (CWS &CWF, 2005). For the ERA of the aquatic environment at Port Burwell, the mallard duck's diet was conservatively modeled as 55% aquatic plants and 45% aquatic invertebrates. The mallard duck consumes approximately 0.37 kg of wet weight food per day and 0.07 L of water or its equivalent per day. According to FCSAP (Environment Canada, 2012), the mallard duck's incidental dry sediment rate is 2.0 - 3.3% of its dry food ingestion rate. 1.2 Great Blue Heron The great blue heron (Ardes herodias) is a large wading bird (greater than 1 m tall), weighing approximately 2.3 kg. During the summer months, great blue herons can be found breeding throughout Canada, except in Newfoundland and Labrador and the northern territories. Great blue herons will overwinter in Canada in British Columbia, and southern Maritime coasts (CWS & CWF 2005). They primarily inhabit aquatic and marine areas, spending most of their time foraging for fish in shallow waters of lakes, rivers, streams. Population density is highly variable since great blue herons are colonial nesters, occasionally forming colonies of several hundred nests per hectare (USEPA 1993). Linear foraging distances from the colony vary between 2.3 - 30 km, with foraging range sizes of 16.6 - 2,2827 km2. The great blue heron feeds predominantly on small freshwater fish. For the ERA of the aquatic environment at Port Burwell, the great blue heron's diet was conservatively modeled as 90% fish and 10% aquatic invertebrates. Adults APPENDIX G Stantec VEC Profiles consume approximately 0.4 kg of wet weight food per day and 0.09 L of water or its equivalent per day. Based on its consumption of these foods, the great blue heron is estimated to incidentally ingest 0.0015 kg/day of dry sediment. 1.3 Muskrat The muskrat (Ondatra zibethicus), which weighs approximately 1.0 kg, is a highly aquatic rodent that is common throughout Canada except in the extreme north, living in saltwater and brackish marshes, freshwater creeks, streams, lakes, marshes and ponds (USEPA, 1993). Foraging ranges vary in configuration depending on aquatic habitat and range from approximately 302 - 7,900 m2. Muskrat are prey for many species including foxes, hawks, minks and otters, and feed primarily on aquatic vegetation, (USEPA, 1993). Active year-round (USEPA, 1993), muskrats consume approximately 0.49 kg of wet weight food per day and 0.1 L of water or its equivalent per day. For the ERA of the aquatic environment at Port Burwell, the muskrat's diet was conservatively modeled as 80% aquatic plants, 15% aquatic invertebrates and 5% fish. Based on its consumption of these foods, the muskrat is estimated to incidentally ingest 0.0046 kg/day of dry sediment. 1.4 River Otter The river otter (Lontra canadensis), which weighs approximately 7.5 kg, is found in the coastal United States and Canada (USEPA, 1993). It inhabits areas showing little human impact in freshwater, estuarine and marine environments, such as the lower portions of streams and rivers, estuaries, non -polluted waterways and lakes and tributaries that feed rivers (USEPA, 1993). Foraging ranges vary by habitat type and are in the range of 9 - 231 km2, or 3.5 - 30 km of river reach. River otters are preyed upon by bobcats, coyotes and birds of prey (Ellis and Dewey, 2003). They feed primarily on fish but are opportunistic and will also feed on crustaceans (e.g., crayfish), aquatic insects, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians (USEPA, 1993). Active year- round (USEPA ,1993), river otters consume approximately 0.91 kg of wet weight food per day and 0.6 L of water or its equivalent per day. For the ERA of the aquatic environment at Port Burwell, the river otter's diet was conservatively modeled as 85% fish and 15% aquatic invertebrates. Based on its consumption of these foods, the river otter is estimated to incidentally ingest 0.0048 kg/day of dry sediment. 5 Stantec 2.0 REFERENCES APPENDIX G VEC Profiles CWS & CWF (Canadian Wildlife Service & Canadian Wildlife Federation). 2005 and 2006. Hinterland Who's Who. Accessed at various times from 2005 to 2007 at http://www.hww.ca. Ellis, E. and T. Dewey. 2003. Lontra canadensis. Animal Diversity Web. Accessed March 22, 2005 at http://animaldiversity.ummz.edu/site/accounts/information/Lontra_canadensis.html. Environment Canada. 2012. Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan (FCSAP) Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance. Report prepared by Azimuth Consulting Group for Environment Canada. March 2012. USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. Wildlife Exposure Factors Handbook. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Office of Research and Development. Washington, D.C. December 1993. SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix H ERA Inputs and Calculations September 11, 2015 ® nnendix F ERA Inputs and Calculations Stantec H.1 Stantec Table of Contents APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR PORT BURWELL.............................................................. 1 2.1 MALLARD DUCK EXPOSURE TO MANGANESE AT THE SITE ............................................ 1 2.1.1 Estimation of Average Daily Doses.............................................................. 1 2.1.2 Estimation of the Hazard Quotient............................................................... 4 3.0 VEC INTAKE PARAMETERS AT PORT BURWELL............................................................... 5 3.1 MALLARD DUCK................................................................................................................ 5 3.2 GREAT BLUE HERON.......................................................................................................... 6 3.3 MUSKRAT............................................................................................................................ 7 3.4 RIVER OTTER....................................................................................................................... 8 4.0 EXPOSURE POINT CONCENTRATIONS FOR PORT BURWELL.......................................... 9 5.0 CALCULATED AVERAGE DAILY DOSES FOR PORT BURWELL...................................... 10 5.1 MALLARD DUCK.............................................................................................................. 10 5.2 GREAT BLUE HERON........................................................................................................ 11 5.3 MUSKRAT.......................................................................................................................... 12 5.4 RIVER OTTER..................................................................................................................... 13 6.0 CALCULATED HAZARD QUOTIENTS FOR PORT BURWELL............................................ 14 6.1 MALLARD DUCK.............................................................................................................. 14 6.2 GREAT BLUE HERON........................................................................................................ 15 6.3 MUSKRAT.......................................................................................................................... 16 6.4 RIVER OTTER..................................................................................................................... 17 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 1.0 Introduction APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations This appendix serves to assist the reader in understanding how the quantitative ecological risk assessment (ERA) was conducted for the aquatic environment at Port Burwell ("the Site). Section 2.0 provides an example calculation using data from the Site, Section 3.0 provides the valued ecosystem component (VEC) intake parameters, and Section 4.0 provides the exposure point concentrations (EPCs) used in calculations. The average daily doses (ADDS) calculated for the Site are provided in Section 5.0 and hazard quotients (HQs) are provided in Section 6.0. 2.0 Example Calculation for Port Burwell The worked example will progress from the exposure assessment (environmental concentrations that a VEC is expected to encounter) through to the ecological risk characterization stage (estimation of risk from all environmental concentrations). This example focuses on mallard duck exposure to manganese in the aquatic environment at Port Burwell. Since the purpose of the ERA was to assess potential exposure to ecological receptors from COPCs in the aquatic environment at the Site (i.e., from sediment and surface water), VEC's diets were modelled as receiving 100% of their diets from the aquatic environment. 2.1 MALLARD DUCK EXPOSURE TO MANGANESE AT THE SITE 2.1.1 Estimation of Average Daily Doses To quantify the potential risk to the mallard duck as a result of manganese (Mn) concentrations at the Site, estimated average daily doses (ADDS) from each applicable exposure pathway were first estimated as defined below: For exposure pathway 'j', Where: ADDi=IFxAFixEPQ ADDj Average Daily Dose of COPC from media j (mg COPC/kg body weight - day) IF Intake Factor for media j (kg contaminated medium/kg body weight - day) AFj Absorption Factor of media j (0.1 for manganese sediment and food ingestion (ATSDR, 2000); default value of 1 for surface water intake) EPC; Exposure Point Concentration of media j (mg chemical/kg medium) Page i Stantec Consulting Ltd. APPENDIX H S l} .a ntec ERA Inputs and Calculations and: IF = (IRI x fsite)/BW IF Intake Factor for media j (kg contaminated medium/kg body weight - day) IRI Ingestion Rate of media j (kg/day) fsite Fraction of time spent on site (dimensionless) BW Body Weight of ecological receptor (in kg) Intake factors (IF) for all ecological receptors for all applicable exposure pathways are presented in this Appendix (Section 2.0). Life history traits for the mallard duck are summarized in Table 1 and exposure point concentrations (EPCs) are shown in Table 2. Table 1 Other Factors Used in Exposure Calculations IMM -1 BW Body weight 1.2 MEL - kg IR Food intake rate 0.37 kg wet-wt/day fsite .--IWI:1-11111-1 Fraction of time spent on site 1 unitless IRsed Ingestion rate 0.002 kg dry-wt/day IFmg-sed Intake factor 0.0017 kg/kg-day v NA Fraction of food intake rate 0.55 unitless IRap Ingestion rate 0.2 kg wet-wt/day IFap Intake factor 0.17 kg/kg-day NA NA Fraction of food intake rate 0.45 unitless IR rate 0.16 kg wet-wt/day IFai Intake factor 0.14 kg/kg-day IRwater Ingestion rate 0.072 L/day IFwater Intake factor 0.06 L/kg-day Page 2 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec Table 2 Site Exposure Point Concentrations for Manganese APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Estimation of manganese ADDS for all exposure pathways applicable to the mallard duck are outlined below: ADDsed = IFing-sed x AFsed x EPCsed Sediment 390 mg/kg dry weight sediment Aquatic Plant 4 mg/kg wet weight aquatic plant material Aquatic Invertebrate 59 mg/kg wet weight aquatic invertebrate material Surface Water 0.057 mg/L surface water Estimation of manganese ADDS for all exposure pathways applicable to the mallard duck are outlined below: ADDsed = IFing-sed x AFsed x EPCsed ADDsed = (0.0017) x (0.1) x (390) ADDsed = 0.06 mg/kg-bw-day ADDap = IFing-ap x AFap x EPCap ADDap = (0.17) x (0.1) x (4) ADDap = 0.07 mg/kg-bw-day ADDai = IFing-ai x AFai x EPCai ADDai = (0.14) x (0.1) x (59) ADDai = 0.8 mg/kg-bw-day ADDwater = IFwater x AFwater x EPCwater ADDwater = (0.06) x (1) x (0.057) ADDwater = 0.0034mg/kg-bw-day To estimate the manganese ADD from all exposure pathways (i.e., the total daily amount of manganese the mallard duck would be expected to ingest as a result of all sources (i.e., dietary items plus associated manganese in sediment and surface water): ADDtotai = ADDsed + ADDap + ADDai+ ADDwater ADDtotai = (0. 06) + (0. 07) + (0.8) + (0.0034) ADDtotai = 0.93 mg/kg-bw-day Page g Stantec Consulting Ltd. APPENDIX H Stantec ERA Inputs and Calculations 2.1.2 Estimation of the Hazard Quotient In the final step of risk characterization, the total ADD is compared against the toxicity reference value (TRV) for manganese exposure to avian receptors in order to estimate a hazard quotient (HQ). In this assessment, a manganese TRV of 180 mg/kg-bw-day was utilized (see the ERA for additional information). Estimation of an HQ for the mallard duck exposed to manganese is thus: HQmanganese= ADDtota /TRVmanganese HQmanganese = 0. 93 mg/kg-bw-day / 180 mg/kg-bw-day HQmanganese = 0.005 Alternatively, each pathway specific ADD may be compared against the TRV to derive a pathway specific HQ. Each individual HQ may then be summed to arrive at a final HQ, which would be identical to that derived via the methods described above. Page 4 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 3.0 VEC Intake Parameters at Port Burwell 3.1 MALLARD DUCK APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Intake Parameters for the Mallard Duck Receptor Name Mallard Duck Name of Study Area Port Burwell Entire Local Study Area or Project Alone Baseline Case No Does the OMOE 511/09 regulation apply to this site? Fraction of organic carbon in the soil 0.01 (unitless) Fraction organic carbon in freshwater (dry) sediment 0.0706 (unitless, usual range is 0.003 to 0.03) Fraction lipid in freshwater invertebrates (wet weight) 0.017 (unitless, usual range is 0.012 to 0.025) Soil Moisture Content 0.25 (cm'/cm') or (ml/cm') Soil Bulk Density 1.487 /cm' Calculate TU based on 1 (1 -top 5% most sensitive species, 2 -Rainbow Trout, 3 -Daphnia ma na Receptor Type 1 1 -Bird, 2 -Mammal Is Receptor Sensitive Species for the Project? 0 1 -Yes, 0 -No (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Fish based on Sediment or Surface Water Uptake 2 Default value should be 2 Benthic Invertebrates based on Sediment or Surface (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Water Uptake 1 Default value should be 1 Aquatic Plants based on Sediment or Surface Water (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Uptake 1 Default value should be 2 General Parameters Body weight 1.2 kg Food intake rate 3.7E-01 kg wet-wt/day Water intake rate 7.2E-02 L/da Ingestion of Surface Water Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Ingestion rate 7.2E-02 L/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -sw 6.0E-02 L/k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Sediment Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction diet that is dry solid -- Fraction of food intake rate Ingestion rate 2.0E-03 kg dry-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -sed 1.7E-03 k /k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Aquatic Plants Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 5.5E-01 Ingestion rate 2.0E-01 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -a 1.7E-01 k /k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Benthic Invertebrates Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 4.5E-01 Ingestion rate 1.6E-01 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -ai 1.4E-01 k /k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Fish Applicable pathway? 0 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 0.0E+00 Ingestion rate 0.0E+00 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -fsh 0.0E+00 kg/kg-day Page 5 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 3.2 GREAT BLUE HERON APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Intake Parameters for the Great Blue Heron Receptor Name Great Blue Heron Name of Study Area Port Burwell Entire Local Study Area or Project Alone Baseline Case No Does the OMOE 511/09 regulation apply to this site? Fraction of organic carbon in the soil 0.01 (unitless) Fraction organic carbon in freshwater (dry) sediment 0.0706 (unitless, usual range is 0.003 to 0.03) Fraction lipid in freshwater invertebrates (wet weight) 0.017 (unitless, usual range is 0.012 to 0.025) Soil Moisture Content 0.25 (cm'/cm') or (ml/cm3) Soil Bulk Density 1.487(g/cm') Calculate TU based on 1 (1 -top 5% most sensitive species, 2 -Rainbow Trout, 3 -Da hnia magna) Receptor Type 1 1 -Bird, 2 -Mammal Is Receptor Sensitive Species for the Project? 0 1 -Yes, 0 -No (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Fish based on Sediment or Surface Water Uptake 2 Default value should be 2 Benthic Invertebrates based on Sediment or Surface (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Water Uptake 1 Default value should be 1 Aquatic Plants based on Sediment or Surface Water (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Uptake 1 Default value should be 2 General Parameters Body weight 2.3 kg Food intake rate 4.1E-01 kg wet-wt/day Water intake rate 9.2E-02 L/da Ingestion of Surface Water Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Ingestion rate 9.2E-02 L/day Fraction from site 0.005 Intake factor IFin -sw 2.0E-04 L/k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Sediment Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction diet that is dry solid 2.5E-01 Fraction of food intake rate 1.4E-02 Ingestion rate 1.5E-03 kg dry-wt/day Fraction from site 0.005 Intake factor IFin -sed 3.2E-06 kg/kg-day Ingestion of Freshwater Aquatic Plants Applicable pathway? 0 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 0.0E+00 Ingestion rate 0.0E+00 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 0.005 Intake factor (Fin -a 0.0E+00 k /k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Benthic Invertebrates Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 1.0E-01 Ingestion rate 4.1E-02 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 0.005 Intake factor IFin -ai 9.0E-05 kg/kg-day Ingestion of Freshwater Fish Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 9.0E-01 Ingestion rate 3.7E-01 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 0.005 Intake factor IFin -fsh 8.1E-04 k /k -da Page 6 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 3.3 MUSKRAT APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Intake Parameters for the Muskrat Receptor Name Muskrat Name of Study Area Port Burwell Entire Local Study Area or Project Alone Baseline Case No Does the OMOE 511/09 regulation apply to this site? Fraction of organic carbon in the soil 0.01 (unitless) Fraction organic carbon in freshwater (dry) sediment 0.0706 (unitless, usual range is 0.003 to 0.03) Fraction lipid in freshwater invertebrates (wet weight) 0.017 (unitless, usual range is 0.012 to 0.025) Soil Moisture Content 0.25 (cm'/cm') or (ml/cm3) Soil Bulk Density 1.487(g/cm') Calculate TU based on 1 (1 -top 5% most sensitive species, 2 -Rainbow Trout, 3 -Da hnia magna) Receptor Type 2 1 -Bird, 2 -Mammal Is Receptor Sensitive Species for the Project? 0 1 -Yes, 0 -No (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Fish based on Sediment or Surface Water Uptake 2 Default value should be 2 Benthic Invertebrates based on Sediment or Surface (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Water Uptake 1 Default value should be 1 Aquatic Plants based on Sediment or Surface Water (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Uptake 1 Default value should be 2 General Parameters Body weight 1 kg Food intake rate 4.9E-01 kg wet-wt/day Water intake rate 1.0E-01 L/da Ingestion of Surface Water Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Ingestion rate 1.0E-01 L/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -sw 1.0E-01 L/k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Sediment Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction diet that is dry solid 1.5E-01 Fraction of food intake rate 6.2E-02 Ingestion rate 4.6E-03 kg dry-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -sed 4.6E-03 kg/kg-day Ingestion of Freshwater Aquatic Plants Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 8.0E-01 Ingestion rate 3.9E-01 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor (Fin -a 3.9E-01 k /k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Benthic Invertebrates Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 1.5E-01 Ingestion rate 7.3E-02 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -ai 7.3E-02 kg/kg-day Ingestion of Freshwater Fish Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 5.0E-02 Ingestion rate 2.4E-02 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 1 Intake factor IFin -fsh 2.4E-02 k /k -da Page '7 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 3.4 RIVER OTTER APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Intake Parameters for the River Otter Receptor Name Riker Otter Name of Study Area Port Burwell Entire Local Study Area or Project Alone Baseline Case No Does the OMOE 511/09 regulation apply to this site? Fraction of organic carbon in the soil 0.01 (unitless) Fraction organic carbon in freshwater (dry) sediment 0.0706 (unitless, usual range is 0.003 to 0.03) Fraction lipid in freshwater invertebrates (wet weight) 0.017 (unitless, usual range is 0.012 to 0.025) Soil Moisture Content 0.25 (cm'/cm') or (ml/cm3) Soil Bulk Density 1.487(g/cm') Calculate TU based on 1 (1 -top 5% most sensitive species, 2 -Rainbow Trout, 3 -Da hnia magna) Receptor Type 2 1 -Bird, 2 -Mammal Is Receptor Sensitive Species for the Project? 0 1 -Yes, 0 -No (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Fish based on Sediment or Surface Water Uptake 2 Default value should be 2 Benthic Invertebrates based on Sediment or Surface (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Water Uptake 1 Default value should be 1 Aquatic Plants based on Sediment or Surface Water (1 -Freshwater Sediment, 2 -Surface Water) Uptake 1 Default value should be 2 General Parameters Body weight 7.5 kg Food intake rate 9.1E-01 kg wet-wt/day Water intake rate 6.0E-01 L/da Ingestion of Surface Water Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Ingestion rate 6.0E-01 L/day Fraction from site 0.08 Intake factor IFin -sw 6.4E-03 L/k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Sediment Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction diet that is dry solid 2.5E-01 Fraction of food intake rate 2.1 E-02 Ingestion rate 4.8E-03 kg dry-wt/day Fraction from site 0.08 Intake factor IFin -sed 5.1E-05 kg/kg-day Ingestion of Freshwater Aquatic Plants Applicable pathway? 0 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 0.0E+00 Ingestion rate 0.0E+00 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 0.08 Intake factor (Fin -a 0.0E+00 k /k -da Ingestion of Freshwater Benthic Invertebrates Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 1.5E-01 Ingestion rate 1.4E-01 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 0.08 Intake factor IFin -ai 1.4E-03 kg/kg-day Ingestion of Freshwater Fish Applicable pathway? 1 (0 = no, 1 = yes) Fraction of food intake rate 8.5E-01 Ingestion rate 7.7E-01 kg wet-wt/day Fraction from site 0.08 Intake factor IFin -fsh 8.2E-03 k /k -da Page 8 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 4.0 Exposure Point Concentrations for Port Burwell APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Constituent Surface Water Concentration (mg/L) Freshwater Sediment Concentration (mg/kg dw) Freshwater Aquatic Plant Concentration (mg/kg ww) Freshwater Benthic Invertebrate Concentration (mg/kg ww) Freshwater Fish Tissue Concentration (mg/kg ww) Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Low Molecular Weight PAHs Acenaphthene 5.0E-06 5.0E-03 9.1E-05 2.1E-05 2.0E-04 Acenaphthylene 5.0E-06 5.0E-03 9.1 E-05 2.0E-05 2.5E-04 Anthracene 5.0E-06 9.2E-03 1.6E-04 3.6E-05 7.9E-04 Fluoranthene 1.4E-05 2.3E-02 4.0E-04 8.7E-05 7.0E-03 Fluorene 5.0E-06 5.0E-03 9.1E-05 2.0E-05 4.0E-04 1 -Meth Inaphthalene 5.0E-06 5.4E-03 9.6E-05 2.2E-05 1.9E-04 2 -Methyl nahthalene 1.1E-05 6.6E-03 1.2E-04 2.7E-05 4.0E-04 Naphthalene 1.5E-05 5.0E-03 9.0E-05 2.2E-05 1.5E-04 Phenanthrene 5.0E-06 1.3E-02 2.3E-04 5.1 E-05 7.9E-04 High Molecular Weight PAHs Benz (a)anthracene 1.3E-05 9.4E-03 1.7E-04 3.3E-05 3.3E-02 Benzo(a)pyrene 1.5E-05 9.1 E-03 1.6E-04 1.6E-04 7.5E-02 Benzo b fluoranthene 2.0E-05 1.5E-02 2.6E-04 5.0E-05 1.3E-01 Benzo ,h,i a lene 5.0E-06 7.5E-03 1.4E-04 1.2E-04 7.9E-02 Benzo ' uoranthene 2.0E-05 1.5E-02 2.6E-04 2.5E-04 2.6E-01 Benzo k fluoranthene 5.0E-06 5.6E-03 1.0E-04 1.9E-05 3.2E-02 Chrysene 1.4E-05 1.1 E-02 2.0E-04 3.9E-05 3.5E-02 Dibenz a,h anthracene 5.0E-06 5.0E-03 9.1E-05 8.2E-05 7.9E-02 Indeno 1,2,3 -cd rene 5.0E-06 7.4E-03 1.3E-04 1.2E-04 1.0E-01 Pyrene 1.3E-05 1.9E-02 3.3E-04 7.1 E-05 5.2E-03 Pesticides DDD '-DDD 2.5E-06 4.0E-03 7.4E-05 1.4E-04 3.0E-02 DDD, o,p'- 2.5E-06 3.0E-03 5.6E-05 1.0E-04 1.0E-02 DDD, o0- + DDD, - 2.5E-06 4.8E-03 8.8E-05 1.6E-04 3.0E-02 DDE (p,p'-DDE) 2.5E-06 7.6E-03 1.4E-04 2.5E-04 9.0E-02 DDE, o,p'- 2.5E-06 1.5E-03 2.9E-05 5.1 E-05 1.0E-02 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, - 2.5E-06 7.6E-03 1.4E-04 2.5E-04 9.0E-02 DDT (p,p'-DDT) 2.5E-06 2.7E-03 5.1 E-05 8.6E-05 1.0E-02 DDT, o,p'- 2.5E-06 1.5E-03 2.9E-05 4.8E-05 1.0E-02 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, - 2.5E-06 2.7E-03 5.1 E-05 8.7E-05 1.0E-02 DDT+ Metabolites 2.5E-06 1.5E-02 2.6E-04 4.7E-04 1.2E-01 DDT Total 2.5E-06 3.4E-02 5.8E-04 1.1 E-03 1.2E-01 Inorganics Manganese 5.7E-02 3.9E+02 4.0E+00 5.9E+01 7.8E+00 Zinc 2.5E-02 3.6E+01 4.6E+00 1.3E+02 6.7E+01 Page 9 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. (11 Stantec APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations 5.0 Calculated Average Daily Doses for Port Burwell 5.1 MALLARD DUCK Page io Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pathwa Surface Water Ingestion Path,, : Freshwater Sediment In esti.. Pathway: Freshwater Plant In .Won Pathway: Freshwater Bent h. Invert. Incest!- Pathway: Freshwater Fish In esti.. Intake Factor Llk da : 6.0E-02 Intake Factor k /k da : 7.7E-03 Intake Factor k Ik -da : 1.7E-01 Intake Factor k /k -da : 1.4E-01 Intake Factor k /k -da : G.nstituen[ Surface Water Con.. (mg/L) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mglkg-day) Freshwater. Sediment Concentration (m9/k9) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater. Aquatic Plant Concentration (m9/1,9) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Benthlc Invertebrate Concentration (mg/kg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kgdsy) Freshwater Fish Concentration (m9/k9) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Total Dally Dose (mg/kg -day) PwclleAromatic Hdrocarbons ocuWcPAHs Acena hlhene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 8.3E-06 9.7E-05 1 1.5E-05 2.7E-05 1 2.8E-06 2.0E-04 1 2.7E-05 Acena hth leve 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 8.3E-06 9.1E-05 1 1.5E-05 2.0E-05 1 2.8E-06 2.5E-04 1 2.7E-05 Anthracene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 9.2E-03 1 1.5E-05 1.6E-04 1 2.8E-05 3.6E -OS 1 4.9E-06 7.9E-04 1 4.8E-05 Fluorenthene 1.4E-05 7 8.4E-07 2.3E-02 1 3.8E-05 4.0E-04 1 6.8E-05 8.7E-05 1 1.2E-05 7.0E-03 1 1.2E-04 Ruorene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 8.3E-06 9.1E-05 1 1.5E-05 2.0E-05 1 2.7E-06 4.0E-04 1 2.7E-05 1 -Meth Ina hthalene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 5.4E-03 1 8.8E-06 9.6E-05 1 1.6E-05 2.2E-05 1 3.0E-06 1.9E-04 1 2.8E-05 2 -Meth Ina hthalene 1.1E -OS 1 6.6E-07 8.6E-03 1 1.1E -O5 1.2E-04 1 2.0E-05 2.7E-05 1 3.7E-06 4.0E-04 1 3.5E-05 Na hthalene 1.5E-05 1 9.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 8.3E-06 9.0E-05 1 1.5E-05 2.2E-05 1 3.0E-06 1.5E-04 t 2.7E-05 Phenanthrene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 1.3E-02 1 2.1E-05 2.3E-04 1 3.9E-05 5.1E-05 1 7.0E-06 7.9E-04 1 6.7E-05 Hi h Molecular Wei ht PAHs Benz a anthracene 1.3E-05 1 7.8E-07 9.4E-03 1 1.5E-05 1.7E-04 1 2.8E-05 3.3E-05 1 4.5E-06 3.3E-02 1 4.9E-05 Benzoa 1.5E-05 1 9.0E-07 9.1E-03 1 1.5E -0 5 1.- 6E04 1 2.7E-05 1.6E-04 1 2.1E-05 7.5E-02 1 6.5E-05 Benzo b fluomnlhene 2.0E-05 1 1.2E-06 1.5E-02 1 2.5E-05 2.6E-04 1 4.4E-05 5.0E-05 1 6.9E-06 1.3E-01 1 7.7E -OS Benzo ,h,i a leve 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 7.5E-03 1 1.2E-05 1.4E-04 1 2.3E-05 1.2E-04 1 1.7E-05 7.9E-02 1 5,2E-05 Benzo' fluoranthene 2.0E-05 1 1.2E-06 1.5E-02 1 2.5E-05 2.6E-04 1 4.4E-05 2.5E-04 1 3.4E-05 2.6E-01 1 1.0E-04 Benzo k fluom.thene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 5.6E-03 1 9.3E-06 1.0E-04 1 t.7E-05 1.9E-05 1 2.6E-06 3.2E-02 1 2.9E-05 Ch s 1.4E-05 1 8.4E-07 1.7E-02 1 1.8E-05 2.0E-04 7 3.3E-05 3.9E-05 1 5.4E-06 3.5E-02 1 5.8E-05 Dibenz a h anthracene 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 8.3E-06 9.1E-05 t 1.5E-05 8.2E-05 1 1.1E-05 7.9E-02 1 3.5E-05 Indeno 1,2,3od 5.0E-06 1 3.0E-07 7.4E-03 1 1.2E-05 1.3E-04 1 2.2E-05 1.2E-04 t 1.6E-05 1.0E-01 7 5.1E -OS P rens 1.3E-05 7 7.8E-07 1.9E-02 7 3.1E-05 3.3E-04 1 5.6E-05 7.1E-05 7 9.8E-06 5.2E-03 7 9.8E-05 Pestleltles.. DDD '-DDD 2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 4.0E-03 1 6.6E-06 7.4E-05 1 1.2E-05 1.4E-04 1 1.9E-05 3.0E-02 1 3.8E-05 DDD, o,p'- 2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 3.0E-03 1 5.0E-06 5.6E-05 1 9.4E-06 1.0E-04 1 1.4E-05 7.0E-02 1 2.9E-05 DDD .,2.5E-06 7 1.5E-07 4.8E-03 1 7.9E-06 8.8E-05 1 1.5E-05 1.6E-041 2.3E-05 3.0E-02 1 4.5E-05 DDE -DDE 2.5E-06 7 1.5E-07 7.6E-03 1 1.2E-05 1.4E-04 1 2.3E-05 2.5E-04 1 3.4E-05 9.0E-02 1 8.9E-05 DDE o 2.5E-06 7 1.5E-07 1.5E-03 1 2.5E-06 2.9E-05 1 4.8E-06 5.1E-05 1 7.0E-06 1.0E-02 1 1.4E-05 T.E�o, '-+ DDE 2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 7.6E-03 1 1.2E-05 1.4E-04 1 2.3E-05 2.5E-04 1 3.5E-05 9.0E-02 1 7.0E-05 T'-DD 2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 2.7E-03 1 4.5E-06 5.1E-05 1 8.6E-06 8.6E-05 1 t.2E-OS 1.0E-02 1 2.5E-05 2DDT a, '- 2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 1.5E-03 1 2.5E-06 2.9E-05 1 4.8E-06 4.8E-05 1 6.6E-06 1.0E-02 1 7.4E-05 DDT .-+ DDT 2.5E-06 7 1.5E-07 2.7E-03 1 4.5E-06 5.1E-05 1 8.6E-06 8.7E-05 1 1.2E-05 1.0E-02 1 2.5E-05 DDT +Metabolites2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 1.5E-02 1 2.5E-05 2.6E-04 1 4.4E-05 4.7E-04 1 6.5E-05 1.2E-01 1 7.3E-04 DDT Total 2.5E-06 1 1.5E-07 3.4E-02 1 5.6E-05 5.8E-04 1 9.7E-05 1.1E-03 1 1.5E-04 1.2E-01 1 3.0E-04 Ino Man ane 5.7E-02 1 3.4E-03 3.9E+02 0.1 6.4E-02 4.0E+00 0.1 6.7E-02 5.9E+01 0.1 8.1E -0i 7.8E+00 0.1 9.4E-01 ➢nc 2.5E-02 1 1.5E-03 3.6E+01 1 6.0E-02 4.6E+00 1 7.7E-01 1.3E+02 1 1.8E+01 6.7E+01 1 1.9E+07 Page io Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. (11 Stantec 5.2 GREAT BLUE HERON APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Page ii Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pathwa Surface Water Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Sediment Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Plant Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Ben[h. Invert. Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Fish Ingestion Intake Factor L/k 1 -day): 2.0E-041ntake Factor (kg/kg-day): 3.2E-06 Intake Factor k /k -0a : - Intake Factor k /k -da : 9.0E-05 Intake Factor (kg/k -day): 8.1E-04 Constituent Surface Water Conn. (mg/L) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Sediment Concenhation (mg/k9) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mglkg-day) Freshwater Aquatic Plant Concentration (mg/kg) Absorption Factor Freshwater Benthie Average Daily Invertebrate Dose (mg/kg-0ay) Concentration (mglk9l Absorption Faetor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg-0ay) Freshwater Fish Concentration (mglkg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Tom Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Pol clic Aromatic tlrocarbons Low Molecular Wei ht PAHs Acenaphthene 5.0E-06 1 1 1.0E-09 5.0E-03 1 1.6E-08 9.1E-05 1 2.1E-05 1 1.8E-09 2.0E-04 1 1.6E-07 1.8E-07 Acena hth lene 5.0E-0fi 1 1.0E-09 5.0E-03 1 1.6E-08 9.1E-05 1 2.0E-05 1 1.8E-09 2.5E-04 1 2.0E-07 2.2E-07 Anthracene 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 9.2E-03 1 2.9E08 1.6E-04 1 3.6E-05 1 3.2E-09 7.9E-04 1 6.4E-07 6.8E-07 Fluoranthene 1.4E-05 1 2.8E-09 2.3E-02 1 7.4E-08 4.0E-04 1 8.7E-05 1 7.8E-09 7.0E-03 1 5.7E-06 5.8E-06 Fluorene 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 5.0E-03 1 1.6E-08 9.1E-05 1 2.0E-05 1 1.8E-09 4.0E-04 1 3.2E-07 3.4E-07 1 -Meth Ina hthalene 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 5.4E-03 1 1.7E-08 9.6E-05 1 2.2E-05 1 2.0E-09 1.9E-04 1 1.5E-07 1.7E-07 2 -Meth Ina hthalene 1.1E-05 1 2.2E-09 6.6E-03 1 2.1E-08 1.2E-04 1 2.7E-05 1 2.4E-09 4.0E-04 1 3.2E-07 3.5E07 Na hthalene 1.5E-05 1 3.0E-09 5.0E-03 1 1.6E-08 9.0E-05 1 2.2E-05 1 1.9E09 1.5E-04 1 1.2E-07 1.4E-07 Phenanthrene 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 1.3E-02 1 4.1E-08 2.3E-04 1 5.1E-05 1 4.6E-09 7.9E-04 1 6.4E-07 6.9E-07 Hi h Molecular Wei ht PAH, Benz a nthracene 1.3E-05 1 2.6E-09 9.4E03 1 3.0E-08 1.7E-04 1 3.3E-05 1 3.0E-09 3.3E-02 1 2.6E-05 2.6E-05 Benzoa m 1.5E-05 1 3.0E-09 9.1E-03 1 2.9E-08 1.6E-04 1 1.6E-04 1 1.4E-08 7.5E-02 1 6.1E-05 6.1E-05 Benzob uoranthene 2.0E-05 1 4.0E-09 1.5E-02 1 4.7E-08 2.6E-04 1 5.0E-05 1 4.5E-09 1.3E-01 1 1.1E-04 1.1E-04 Benzo h,i lene 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 7.5E-03 1 2.4E-08 1.4E-04 1 1.2E-04 1 1.1E-08 7.9E-02 1 6.4E-05 6.4E-05 Benzo' uoranihene 2.0E-05 1 4.0E-09 1.5E-02 1 4.7E-08 2.6E-04 1 2.5E-04 1 2.2E-08 2.6E-01 1 2.1E-04 2.1E-04 Benzo k uoran'hena 5.0E-0fi. 1 1.0E-09 5.6E-03 1 1.8E-08 1.0E-04 1 1.9E-05 1 1.7E-09 3.2E-02 1 2.6E-05 2.6E-95 Ch Bene 1.4E-05 1 2.8E-09 1.1E-02 1 3.6E-08 2.0E-94 1 3.9E-05 1 3.5E-09 3.5E-02 1 2.8E-05 2.9E-05 Dibenz a,h nthracene 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 5.0E-03 1 1.6E-08 9.1E-05 1 8.2E-05 1 7.4E-09 7.9E-02 1 6.4E-05 6.4E-05 Indeno1,2,3-cd 5.0E-06 1 1.0E-09 7.4E-03 1 2.3E-08 1.3E-04 1 1.2E-04 1 1.1E-08 1.0E-01 1 8.1E-05 8.1E-05 P rane 1.3E-05 1 2.6E-09 1.9E-02 1 6.0E-08 3.3E-04 1 7.1E-05 1 6.4E-09 5.2E-03 1 4.2E-06 4.3E-06 Pesicideslow _ DDD, '-DDD 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 4.0E-03 1 1.3E-08 7.4E-05 1 1.4E-04 1 1.2E-08 3.0E-02 1 2.4E-05 2.4E-05 DDD, a, '- 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 3.0E-03 1 9.5E-09 5.6E-05 1 1.0E-04 1 9.3E-09 1.0E-02 1 8.1E-06 8.1E-06 DDD, '- 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 4.8E-03 1 1.5E-08 8.8E-05 1 1.6E-04 1 1.5E-08 3.0E-02 1 2.4E-05 2.4E-05 DDE E 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 7.6E-03 1 2.4E-08 1.4E-04 1 2.5E-04 1 2.2E-08 9.0E-02 1 7.3E-05 7.3605 DDE, o, '- 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 1.5E-03 1 4.8E-09 2.9E-05 1 5.1E-05 1 4.6E-09 1.0E-02 1 8.1E-06 8.1E-06 DDE, a, '-+DDE, '- 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 7.6E-03 1 2.4E-08 1.4E-04 1 2.5E 04 1 2.3E-08 9.0E-02 1 7.3E-05 7.3E-05 DDT -0D 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 2.7E03 1 8.7E-09 5.1E-05 1 8.6E-05 1 7.8E-09 1.0E-02 1 8.1E-06 8.1E-06 DDT, o, '- 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 1.5E-03 1 4.8E-09 2.9E-05 1 4.8E-05 1 4.3E-09 1.0E-02 1 8.1E-06 8.1E-06 DDT, o, '-+DDT '- , , 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 2.7E-03 1 8.7E-09 5.1E-05 1 8.7E-05 1 7.8E-09 1.0E-02 1 6.1E-06 8.1E-06 DDT +Metabolites 2.5E-0fi 1 5.0E-10 1.5E-02 1 4.7E-08 2.6E-04 1 4.7E-04 1 4.3E-08 1.2E-01 1 9.7E-05 9.7E-05 DDT Total 2.5E-06 1 5.0E-10 3.4E-02 1 1.1E-07 5.8E-04 1 1.1E-03 1 9.7E-08 1.2E-01 1 9.7E-05 9.7E-05 Ino enles. Man anese 5.7E-02 i 1 1.1E-05 3.9E+02 0.1 1.2E-04 4.0E+00 0.1 5.9E+01 0.1 5.3E-04 7.8E+00 0.1 6.3E-04 1.3E-03 ZZnc 2.5E-02 1 4.9E-06 3.6E+01 1 1.1E-04 4.6E+00 1 1.3E+02 1 1.2E-02 6.7E+01 1 5.4E-02 6.6E-02 Page ii Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. (11 Stantec 5.3 MUSKRAT APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Page 12 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Palhwa Surface Water Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Se diment Ingestion Pathway: Freshwate r Plant Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Berth. Invert. Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Fish Ingestion Intake F,., L/k -da : 1.0E-01 Intake Factor k /k -da : 4.6E-03 Intake Factor k /k -da : 3.9E-01 Intake Factor(kg/k -da : 7.3E-02 Intake Factor(kg/kg-day): 2.4E-02 Constituent Surface Water Cones (mg/L) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Sediment Concentration Ing/k9) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mglkg-day) Freshwater Aquatic Plant Concentration (mg/kg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mglkg-day) Freshwater Benthic Invertebrate Concentration (mglkg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Fish Concentration (mglkg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Total Daily Dose (mglkg-day) PoI clic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Low Molecular Wei hl PAHs Arena Mhene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 5.0E03 1 2.3E-05 MEN 1 3.6E -OS 2.1E -OS 1 1.5E-06 2.0E-04 1 4.9E-06 6.5E-05 Arena hlh lane 5.0E-06 1 5.0E07 5.0E03 1 2.3E-05 9.1E-05 1 3.6E-05 2.0E-05 1 1.5E-06 2.5E-04 1 6.1E-06 6.7E-05 Arthmcene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 9.2E-03 1 4.2E-05 1.6E-04 1 6.4E-05 3.6E-05 1 2.6E-06 7.9E-04 1 1.9E-05 1.3E-04 Fluomnthene 1.4E-05 1 1.4E-06 2.3E-02 1 1.1E-04 4.0E-04 1 1.6E-04 8.7E-05 1 6.4E-06 7.0E-03 1 1.7E-04 4.4E-04 Fluorene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 2.3E-05 9.1E-05 1 3.6E-05 2.0E-05 1 1.5E-06 4.0E-04 1 9.7E-06 7.0E-05 1 -Meth Ina hthalene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 5.4E-03 1 2.4E-05 9.6E-05 1 3.8E-05 2.2E-05 1 1.6E-05 1.9E-04 1 4.5E-06 6.9E-05 2 -Meth Ina hthalene 1.1E-05 1 1.1E-06 6.6E-03 1 3.0E-05 1.2E-04 1 4.6E-05 2.7E-05 i 2.0E-06 4.0E-04 1 9.8E-06 8.9E-05 Na hthalene 1.5E-05 1 1.5E-06 5.0E-03 1 2.3E-05 9.0E-05 1 3.5E-05 2.2E-05 1 1.6E-06 1.5E-04 1 3.7E-06 6.5E-05 Phenanthrene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 1.3E-02 1 5.9E-05 2.3E-04 1 9.0E-05 5.1E-05 1 3.7E-06 7.9E-04 1 1.9E-05 1.7E-04 Hh Molecular Wel ht PAHs Benzes nlhracene 1.3E05 1 1.3E-06 94E-03 1 4.3E-05 1.7E-04 1 6.5E-05 3.3E-05 1 2.4E-06 3.3E-02 1 8.0E-04 9.1E-04 Benzoa 1.5E-05 1 1.5E-06 9.1E-03 1 4.2E-05 1.6E-04 1 6.4E-05 1.6E-04 1 1.1E-05 7.5E-02 1 1.8E-03 2.0E-03 Benzo b fluomnlhene 2.0E-05 1 2.0E-006 1.5E-02 1 6.8E-05 2.6E-04 1 1.0E-04 S.DE-05 1 3.7E-06 1.3E-01 1 3.3E-03 3.4E-03 Benzo ,In, lane 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 7.5E-03 1 3.4E-05 1.4E-04 1 5.3E-05 1.2E-04 1 9.0E-06 7.9E-02 1 1.9E-03 2.0E-03 Benz fluomnlhene 2.0E-05 1 2.0E-06 1.5E-02 1 6.8E-05 2.6E-04 1 1.0E-04 2.5E-04 1 1.8E-05 2.8E-01 1 6.4E-03 6.6&03 Benz k uomnlhene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 5.6E-03 1 2.6E-05 1.0E-04 1 4.0E-05 1.9E-05 1 1.4E-06 3.2E-02 1 7.7E-04 8.4E-04 Ch se 1.4E-05 1 1.4E-06 1.1E-02 1 5.1E05 2.0E-04 1 7.8E-05 3.9E-05 1 2.9E-06 3.5E-02 1 8.6E-04 9.9E-04 Dibenz aeh nth2cene 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 5.0E-03 1 2.3E-05 9.1E-05 1 3.6E-05 8.2E-05 1 6.0E-06 7.9E-02 1 1.9E-03 2.0E-03 Indeno 1,2,3 -cd 5.0E-06 1 5.0E-07 7.4E-03 1 3.4E-05 1.3E-04 1 5.2E-05 1.2E-04 1 8.8E-06 1.0E-01 1 2.4E-03 2.5E-03 P rare 1.3E-05 1 1.3E-06 1.9E-02 1 8.7E-05 3.3E-04 1 1.3E-04 7.1E-05 1 5.2E-06 5.2E-03 1 1.3E-04 3.5E-04 Pesticides DDD '-DDD 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 4.0E-03 1 1.8E-05 7.4E-05 1 2.9E-05 1.4E-04 1 1.0E-05 3.0E-02 1 7.3E-04 7.9E-04 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 3.0E-03 1 1.4E-05 5.6E-05 1 2.2E-05 1.0E-04 1 7.6E-06 1.0E-02 1 2.4E-04 2.9E-04 DDD, o, -+DDD, 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 4.8E-03 1 2.2E-05 8.8E-05 1 3.4E-05 1.6E-04 1 1.2E-05 3.0E-02 1 7.3E-04 8.0E-04 DDE -DDE 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 7.6E-03 1 3.4E-05 1.4E-04 1 5.3E-05 2.5E-04 1 1.8E-05 9.0E-02 1 2.2E-03 2.3E-03 DDE o '- 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 1.5E03 1 6.8E-06 2.9E-05 1 1.1E-05 5.1E-05 1 3.8E-06 1.0E-02 1 2.4E-04 2.7E-04 DDE,o '-+DDE 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 7.6E-03 1 3.4E-05 1.4E-04 1 5.3E-05 2.5E-04 1 1.8E-05 9-0E-02 1 2.2E-03 2.3E-03 DDT ,-DD 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 2.7E-03 1 1.2E-05 5.1E-05 1 2.0E-05 8.6E-05 1 6.3E-06 1.0E-02 1 2.4E-04 2.8E-04 DDT, .#- 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 1.5E-03 1 6.8E-06 2.9E-05 1 1.1E-05 4.8E-05 1 3.5E-06 1.0E-02 1 2.4E-04 2.7E-04 DDT, o '-+DDT 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 2.7E-03 1 1.2E-05 5.1E-05 1 2.0E-05 8.7E-05 1 6.3E-06 1.0E-02 1 2.4E-04 2.8E-04 DDT +Metabolites 2.5E-0fi 1 2.5E-07 1.5E-02 1 6.8E-05 2.6E-04 1 1.0E-04 4.7E-04 1 3.5E-05 1.2E-01 1 2.9E-03 3.1E-03 DDTTotal 2.5E-06 1 2.5E-07 3.4E-02 1 1.5E-04 5.8E-04 1 2.3E-04 1.1E-03 1 7.9E-05 1.2E-01 1 2.9E-03 3.4E-03 Ino antes Man erase 5.7E-02 1 5.7E-03 3.9E+02 0.1 I 1.8E-01 4.0E+00 0.1 1.6E-01 5.9E+01 0.1 4.3E-01 7.8E+00 0.1 1.9E-02 7.9E-01 Zinc 2.5E-02 1 2.5E-03 3.6E+01 7 1.6E-01 4.6E+00 1 1.8E+00 1.3E+02 1 9.8E+00 6.7E+01 1 1.6E+00 1.3E+01 Page 12 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. (11 Stantec 5.4 RIVER OTTER APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Page 13 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Pathwa Surface Water Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Sediment Ingestion Pathwa : Freshwater Plant Ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Beath. Invert. ingestion Pathway: Freshwater Fish Ingestion Intake Factor L/k .d. 6.4E-03 Intake Factor k /k da : 5.7E-011ntake Factor 11al da - Intake Factor (kal -da : 7.4E.03 Intake Factor Well -0a : 8.2E-03 Constituent Surtace Water Conc. (mglL) Absorption Factor Freshwater Average Daily Setliment Dose (mg/kg -day) Concentration (mg/kg) Absorption Factor Freshwater Average Daily Aquatic Plant Dose (mglkg-day) Concentration (mg/kg) Absorption Factor Freshwater Benthlc Average Daily in Dose (mg/kgday) Concentration mg/kg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Fish Concentration (mg/kg) Absorption Factor Average Daily Dose (mglkg-day) Total Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Pol c clic Aromatic H drocarbons Low Molecular Weight PAH. Acena hthene 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 5.0E-03 1 2.6E-07 9.1E-05 1 2.1E-05 1 3.0E-08 2.0E-04 1 1.6E-06 2.0E-06 Acena hth lene 5.0E-06 7 3.2E-08 5.0E-03 1 2.6E47 9.1E-05 1 2.0E-05 1 2.9E-08 2.5E-04 1 2.tE06 2.4E-06 Anthracene 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 9.2E-03 1 4,7E-07 1.6E-04 1 3.6E-05 1 5.2E-08 7.9E-04 t 6.5E-06 7.1E -0B Pluorenthene 1.4E-05 1 9,0E-08 2.3E-02 1 1.2E-06 4,0E-04 1 8,7E4)5 1 1,3E-07 7.0E-03 1 5.8E-05 5.9E-05 Fluorene 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 5.0E03 1 2.6E-07 9.7E-05 1 2.0E-05 1 2.9E-08 4.0E-04 1 3.3E-06 3.6E-06 1lrleth Ina hthalene 5.0E-96 1 3.2E-08 5.4E-03 1 2.7E-07 9.6E-05 1 2.2E-05 1 3.2E-08 1.9E-04 1 1.5E-06 1.9E-06 2 -Meth Ina hthalene 1.1E-05 t 7.0E-08 6.6E-03 1 3.4E-07 1.2E-04 1 2.7E-05 1 3.9E-08 4.0E-04 t 3.3E-06 3.7E-06 Na hthalene 1.5E-05 1 9.6E-08 5.0E-03 1 2.6E4)7 9.0E-05 1 2.2E-05 1 3,1E418 1.5E-04 1 1.2E-06 1.6E-06 Phenanthrene 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 1.3E-02 1 6.7E-07 2.3E-04 1 5.1E-05 1 7.3E-08 7.9E-04 1 6.5E-06 7.3E-06 Hi h Molewlar Wei ht PAH, Benz a anthracene 1.3E-05 7 8.3E-08 9.4E-03 1 4.8E-07 1.7E-04 1 3.3E-05 1 4.8E08 3.3E-02 7 2.7E-04 2.7E-04 Benzoa r 1.5E-05 1 9,6E-08 9.1E-03 1 4,7E-07 1,6E-04 1 1,6E-04 1 2.3E-07 7.5E-02 1 6,2E-04 6.2E-04 Benzob uorardhene 2.0E-05 1 1.3E-07 7.5E-02 1 7.6E-07 2.6E-04 1 5.0E-05 1 7.3E-08 1.3E-01 1 1.7E-03 1.7E-03 Benzo ,h,i lene 5.0E-06 7 3.2E-08 7.5E-03 1 3.9E-07 1.4E-04 1 1.2E-04 1 1.8E-07 7.9E-02 1 6.5E-04 6.5E-04 Benzo' uoranthene 2.0E-05 1 1.3E-07 1.5E-02 1 7.6E-07 2.6E-04 1 2.5E-04 1 3.6E-07 2.6E-01 t 2.2E-03 2.2E-03 Benzo k -ranthene 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 5.6E-03 1 2.9E-07 1.0E-04 1 1.9E-05 1 2.8E-08 3.2E-02 1 2.6E-04 2.6E-04 Ch Bene 1.4E-05 1 9.0E-08 1.1E-02 1 5.7E-07 2.0E-04 1 3.9E05 1 5.7E-08 3.5E-02 1 2.9E-04 2.9E-04 Dibenz a,h anthracene 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 5.0E-03 1 2.6E-07 9.1E-05 1 8.2E-05 1 1.2E-07 7.9E-02 1 6.5E-04 6.5E-04 Indeno 1 2,3 -cd 5.0E-06 1 3.2E-08 7.4E-03 1 3.8E-07 1.3E-04 1 1.2E-04 1 1.7E-07 1.0E-01 1 8.2E-04 8.2E-04 P rene 1.3E-05 1 8.3E-08 1.9E-02 1 9.7E-07 3.3E-04 1 7.1E-05 1 1.0E-07 5.2E-03 1 4.2E-05 4,4E-05 Pesticide. DDD '-DDD 2.5E-06 1 1.6E-08 4.0E-03 1 2.1E-07 TAE -05 1 14E-04 1 2.0E-07 3.0E-02 1 2.5E-04 2.5E-04 2.5E-06 1 1.6E-08 3.0E-03 1 1.5E-07 5.6E-05 1 1.0E -04I 1.5E417 1.0E-02 1 8.2E-05 8.2E-05 Do, '-+DDD, OD, 2.5E-06 7 1.6E-08 4.8E-03 1 2.5E-07 B.BE-05 1 1.6E-04 1 2.4E-07 3.0E-02 1 2.5E-04 2.5E-04 DDE -DDE 2.5E-06 7 1.6E-08 7.6E-03 1 3.9E-07 1,4E-04 1 25E-04 1 3.6E-07 9.0E-02 t 7.4E-04 7.4E-04 DDE, o, '- 2.5E-06 7 1.6E-08 7.5E-03 1 7.7E-08 2.9E-05 1 5.1E-05 1 7.4E-08 1.0E-02 t 8.2E-05 8.2E-05 DDE, o, '-+ DDE 2.5E-06 1 1.6E-08 7,6E-03 1 3.9E-07 1.4E-041 2.5E-04 1 3.7E-07 9.0E-02 7 7,4E-04 7.4E-04 DDT ,-DD 2.5E-06 1 1.6E-08 2.7E-03 1 1.4E-07 5.1E-05 1 8.6E-05 1 1.2E-07 1.0E-02 t 8.2E-05 8.2E-05 DDT o,p- 2.5E-06 1 1,6E-08 1.5E-03 1 7.7E-08 2.9E-05 1 4.8E-05 1 6.9E-08 1.0E-02 1 8,2E-05 8.2E-05 DDT, o,-+ DDT, , '- 2.5E-06 1 1.6E-08 2.7E-03 1 1.4E-07 5.1E-05 1 8.7E-05 1 1.3E-07 1.0E-02 7 8.2E-05 8.2E-05 DDT+ Metabolites 2.5E-06 1 1,6E-08 1.5E-02 1 7.6E-07 2.6E-04 1 4.7E-04 1 6.8E-07 1.2E-01 1 9.9E-04 9.9E-04 DDT Total 2.5E-06 1 1.6E-08 3.4E-02 1 1.7E-06 5.8E-04 1 1.1E-03 1 1.6E-06 1.2E-01 1 9.9E-04 9.9E-04 Inorganics Manganese 5.7E-02 1 3.7E-04 3.9E+02 0.1 2.0E-03 4.0E+00 0.1 5.9E+Oi 0.1 8.5E-03 7.8E+00 0.1 6.4E-03 7.7E-02 Lnc 2.5E-02 7 1.6E-04 3.6E+01 1 1.9E-03 4.6E+00 1 1.3E+02 1 1.9E-01 6.7E+01 1 5.5E-01 17.4E-01 Page 13 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 6.0 Calculated Hazard Quotients for Port Burwell 6.1 MALLARD DUCK APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Constituent Reference Toxicity Dose (mg/kg -day) Average Daily Dose (mglkg-day) Surface Water Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Sediment Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Aquatic Plant Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Benthic Invertebrate Ingestion HQ Average Daily Freshwater fish Dom Ingestion HQ (mg/kg -day) Total Hazard Quotient Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Low Molecular Weight PAHs Acena hthene 3.0E-07 8.3E-06 1.5E-05 2.8E-06 No Value Acena hth lene 3.0E-07 8.3E-06 1.5E-05 2.8E-06 No Value Anthracene 3.0E-07 1.5E-05 2.8E-05 4.9E-06 No Value Fluoranthene 8.4E-07 3.8E-05 6.8E-05 1.2E-05 No Value Fluorene 3.0E-07 8.3E-06 1.5E-05 2.7E-06 No Value 1 -Methylnaphthalene 3.0E-07 8.8E-06 1.6E-05 3.0E-06 No Value 2 -Methylnaphthalene 6.6E-07 1.1E-05 2.0E-05 3.7E-06 No Value Naphthalene 9.0E-07 8.3E-06 1.5E-05 3.0E-06 No Value Phenanthrene - 3.0E-07 - 2.1E-05 --- 3.9E-05 --- 7.0E-06 - No Value No LPAH HQ = Not A2plicable High Molecular Weight PAHs Benz(a)anthracene - 7.8E-07 - 1.5E-05 -- 2.8E-05 --- 4.5E-06 -- -- -- No Value Benzo(a)pyrene - 9.0E-07 - 1.5E-05 --- 2.7E-05 --- 2.1E-05 --- --- --- No Value Benzo b fluoranthene - 1.2E-06 - 2.5E-05 - 4.4E-05 --- 6.9E-06 - --- --- No Value Benzo ,h,i a lene - 3.0E-07 - 1.2E-05 -- 2.3E-05 --- 1.7E-05 - --- --- No Value Benzo' fluoranthene - 1.2E-06 - 2.5E-05 --- 4.4E-05 --- 3.4E-05 - --- --- No Value Benzo k fluoranthene - 3.0E-07 - 9.3E-06 --- 1.7E-05 --- 2.6E-06 --- --- --- No Value Ch Bene - 8.4E-07 - 1.8E-05 -- 3.3E-05 --- 5.4E-06 - --- --- No Value Dibenz a,h anthracene 3.0E-07 8.3E-06 1.5E-05 1.1E-05 No Value Indeno 1,2,3cd rene 3.0E-07 1.2E-05 2.2E-05 1.6E-05 No Value Pyrene 7.8E-07 3.1E-05 5.6E-05 9.8E-06 No Value TOTAL HPAH HQ = Not Applicable TOTAL PAH HQ = Not Applicable Pesticides DDD (p,p'-DDD) 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 6.6E-06 2.9E-05 1.2E-05 5.5E-05 1.9E-05 8.3E-05 1.68E-04 DDD, o,p- 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 5.0E-06 2.2E-05 9.4E-06 4.1E-05 1.4E-05 6.3E-05 1.27E-04 DDD, o, '-+ DDD, 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 7.9E-06 3.5E-05 1.5E-05 6.5E-05 2.3E-05 1.0E-04 2.00E-04 DDE , '-DDE 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 1.2E-05 5.5E-05 2.3E-05 1.0E-04 3.4E-05 1.5E-04 3.05E-04 DDE, o,p'- 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 2.5E-06 1.1E-05 4.8E-06 2.1E-05 7.0E-06 3.1E-05 6.38E-05 DDE, o, '-+ DDE, , '- 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 1.2E-05 5.5E-05 2.3E-05 1.0E-04 3.5E-05 1.5E-04 3.09E-04 DDT '-DD 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 4.5E-06 2.0E-05 8.6E-06 3.8E-05 1.2E-05 5.2E-05 1.10E-04 DDT, o,p'- 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 2.5E-06 1.1E-05 4.8E-06 2.1E-05 6.6E-06 2.9E-05 6.17E-05 DDT, o '-+ DDT, p, '- 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 4.5E-06 2.0E-05 8.6E-06 3.8E-05 1.2E-05 5.2E-05 1.11E-04 DDT + Metabolites 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 2.5E-05 1.1E-04 4.4E-05 1.9E-04 6.5E-05 2.9E-04 5.89E-04 DDT Total 2.3E-01 1.5E-07 6.6E-07 5.6E-05 2.5E-04 9.7E-05 4.3E-04 1.5E-04 6.5E-04 1.33E-03 Inorganics Manganese 1.8E+02 3.4E-03 1.9E-05 6.4E-02 3.6E-04 6.7E-02 3.7E-04 8.1E-01 4.5E-03 5.27E-03 Zinc 8.9E+01 1.5E-03 1.7E-05 6.0E-02 6.7E-04 7.7E-01 8.7E-03 1.8E+01 2.0E-01 2.14E-01 Page 14 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 6.2 GREAT BLUE HERON APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Constituent Reference Toxicity Dose (mg/kg -day) f*ae rage Daily Dose ;mg/kg -day) Surface Water Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Sediment Ingestion HQ Average Dally Freshwater Dose Aquatic Plant (mg/kg -day) Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Ber Invertebrate Ingestion HQ Average Daily Freshwater Fish DOS Ingestion HQ (mg/kg -day) Total Hazard Quotient Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Low Molecular Weight PAHs Acena hthene -- 1.0E-09 - 1.6E-08 -- -- -- 1.8E-09 - 1.6E-07 - No Value Acena hth len. -- 1.0E-09 -- 1.6E-08 --- --- --- 1.8E-09 - 2.0E-07 - No Value Anthracene - 1.0E-09 - 2.9E-08 -- -- --- 3.2E-09 - 6.4E-07 - No Value Fluoranthene - 2.8E-09 - 7.4E-08 --- --- --- 7.8E-09 - 5.7E-06 - No Value Fluorene - 1.0E-09 - 1.6E-08 -- -- --- 1.8E-09 -- 3.2E-07 - No Value 1 -Meth Ina hthalene -- 1.0E-09 - 1.7E-08 --- --- --- 2.0E-09 --- 1.5E-07 - No Value 2 -Methylnaphthalene - 2.2E-09 - 2.1E-08 -- -- --- 2.4E-09 --- 3.2E-07 - No Value Naphthalene - 3.0E-09 - 1.6E-08 --- --- --- 1.9E-09 -- 1.2E-07 - No Value Phenanthrene - 1.0E-09 - 4.1E-08 --- --- --- 4.6E-09 - 6.4E-07 - No Value TOTAL LPAH HQ = Not Applicable High Molecular Weight PAHs Benz(a)anthracene - 2.6E-09 - 3.0E-08 --- --- --- 3.0E-09 - 2.6E-05 - No Value Benzo a rene - 3.0E-09 - 2.9E-08 --- --- --- 1.4E-08 -- 6.1E-05 -- No Value Benzo b fluoranthene - 4.0E-09 - 4.7E-08 --- --- --- 4.5E-09 - 1.1E-04 -- No Value Benzo ,h,i a lene - 1.0E-09 - 2.4E-08 --- --- --- 1.1E-08 --- 6.4E-05 --- No Value Benzo' fluoranthene - 4.0E-09 - 4.7E-08 --- --- --- 2.2E-08 --- 2.1E-04 --- No Value Benzo k uoranthene - 1.0E-09 - 1.8E-08 --- --- --- 1.7E-09 - 2.6E-05 --- No Value Ch Bene - 2.8E-09 - 3.6E-08 --- --- --- 3.5E-09 --- 2.8E-05 --- No Value Dibenz a,h anthracene - 1.0E-09 - 1.6E-08 -- --- --- 7.4E-09 - 6.4E-05 --- No Value Indeno 1,2,3 -cd rene 1.0E-09 2.3E-08 1.1E-08 8.1E-05 No Value Pyrene 2.6E-09 6.0E-08 6.4E-09 4.2E-06 No Value TOTAL HPAH HQ = Not Applicable TOTAL PAH HQ = Not Applicable Pesticides DDD , '-DDD 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 1.3E-08 5.6E-08 1.2E-08 5.4E-08 2.4E-05 1.1E-04 1.07E-04 DDD, o,p'- 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 9.5E-09 4.2E-08 9.3E-09 4.1E-08 8.1E-06 3.6E-05 3.58E-05 DDD, o, '-+ DDD, 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 1.5E-08 6.7E-08 1.5E-08 6.5E-08 2.4E-05 1.1E-04 1.07E-04 DDE , '-DDE 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 2.4E-08 1.1E-07 2.2E-08 9.8E-08 7.3E-05 3.2E-04 3.21E-04 DDE, o,p- 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 4.8E-09 2.1E-08 4.6E-09 2.0E-08 8.1E-06 3.6E-05 3.57E-05 DDE, o, '-+ DDE, , '- 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 2.4E-08 1.1E-07 2.3E-08 1.0E-07 7.3E-05 3.2E-04 3.21E-04 DDT , '-DD 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 8.7E-09 3.8E-08 7.8E-09 3.4E-08 8.1E-06 3.6E-05 3.58E-05 DDT, o,p'- 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 4.8E-09 2.1E-08 4.3E-09 1.9E-08 8.1E-06 3.6E-05 3.57E-05 DDT, o, '-+ DDT, 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 8.7E-09 3.8E-08 7.8E-09 3.4E-08 8.1E-06 3.6E-05 3.58E-05 DDT +Metabolites2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 4.7E-08 2.1E-07 4.3E-08 1.9E-07 9.7E-05 4.3E-04 4.29E-04 DDT Total 2.3E-01 5.0E-10 2.2E-09 1.1E-07 4.8E-07 9.7E-08 4.3E-07 9.7E-05 4.3E-04 4.29E-04 Inorganics Manganese 1.8E+02 1.1E-05 6.4E-08 1.2E-04 6.9E-07 5.3E-04 3.0E-06 6.3E-04 3.5E-06 7.24E-06 Zinc 8.9E+01 4.9E-06 5.5E-08 1.1E-04 1.3E-06 1.2E-02 1.3E-04 5.4E-02 6.1E-04 7.44E-04 Page 15 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 6.3 MUSKRAT APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Constituent Reference Toxicity Dose (mg/kg -day) f*ae rage Daily Dose ;mg/kg -day) Surface Water Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Sediment Ingestion HQ Average Dally Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Aquatic Plant Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Ber Invertebrate Ingestion HQ Average Daily Freshwater Fish DOS Ingestion HQ (mg/kg -day) Total Hazard Quotient Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Low Molecular Weight PAI -Is Acenaphthene 1.7E+02 5.0E-07 2.9E-09 2.3E-05 1.3E-07 3.6E-05 2.1E-07 1.5E-06 8.8E-09 4.9E-06 2.9E-08 3.85E-07 Acenaphthylene 1.7E+02 5.0E-07 2.9E-09 2.3E-05 1.3E-07 3.6E-05 2.1E-07 1.5E-06 8.8E-09 6.1E-06 3.6E-08 3.92E-07 Anthracene 1.7E+02 5.0E-07 2.9E-09 4.2E-05 2.5E-07 6.4E-05 3.8E-07 2.6E-06 1.5E-08 1.9E-05 1.1E-07 7.57E-07 Fluoranthene 1.7E+02 1.4E-06 8.2E-09 1.1E-04 6.2E-07 1.6E-04 9.3E-07 6.4E-06 3.7E-08 1.7E-04 1.0E-06 2.60E-06 Fluorene 1.7E+02 5.0E-07 2.9E-09 2.3E-05 1.3E-07 3.6E-05 2.1E-07 1.5E-06 8.6E-09 9.7E-06 5.7E-08 4.13E-07 1 -Methylnaphthalene 1.7E+02 5.0E-07 2.9E-09 2.4E-05 1.4E-07 3.8E-05 2.2E-07 1.6E-06 9.5E-09 4.5E-06 2.7E-08 4.05E-07 2 -Methylnaphthalene 1.7E+02 1.1E-06 6.5E-09 3.0E-05 1.8E-07 4.6E-05 2.7E-07 2.0E-06 1.2E-08 9.8E-06 5.7E-08 5.26E-07 Naphthalene 1.7E+02 1.5E-06 8.8E-09 2.3E-05 1.3E-07 3.5E-05 2.1E-07 1.6E-06 9.3E-09 3.7E-06 2.2E-08 3.81E-07 Phenanthrene 1.7E+02 5.0E-07 2.9E-09 5.9E-05 3.5E-07 9.0E-05 5.3E-07 3.7E-06 2.2E-08 1.9E-05 1.1E-07 1.02E-06 TOTAL LPAH HQ = 6.88E-06 High Molecular Weight PAHs Benz(a)anthracene 1.8E+01 1.3E-06 7.2E-08 4.3E-05 2.4E-06 6.5E-05 3.6E-06 2.4E-06 1.3E-07 8.0E-04 4.4E-05 5.05E-05 Benzo(a)pyrene 1.8E+01 1.5E-06 8.3E-08 4.2E-05 2.3E-06 6.4E-05 3.5E-06 1.1E-05 6.3E-07 1.8E-03 1.0E-04 1.09E-04 Benzob uoranthene 1.8E+01 2.0E-06 1.1E-07 6.8E-05 3.8E-06 1.0E-04 5.7E-06 3.7E-06 2.0E-07 3.3E-03 1.8E-04 1.91E-04 Benzo ,h,i a lene 1.8E+01 5.0E-07 2.8E-08 3.4E-05 1.9E-06 5.3E-05 2.9E-06 9.0E-06 5.0E-07 1.9E-03 1.1E-04 1.13E-04 Benzo Buoranthene 1.8E+01 2.0E-06 1.1E-07 6.8E-05 3.8E-06 1.0E-04 5.7E-06 1.8E-05 1.0E-06 6.4E-03 3.6E-04 3.68E-04 Benzo k uoranthene 1.8E+01 5.0E-07 2.8E-08 2.6E-05 1.4E-06 4.0E-05 2.2E-06 1.4E-06 7.7E-08 7.7E-04 4.3&05 4.66E-05 Ch Bene 1.8E+01 1.4E-06 7.8E-08 5.1E-05 2.8E-06 7.8E-05 4.3E-06 2.9E-06 1.6E-07 8.6E-04 4.8E-05 5.51E-05 Dibenza,h nthracene 1.8E+01 5.0E-07 2.8E-08 2.3E-05 1.3E-06 3.6E-05 2.0E-06 6.0E-06 3.3E-07 1.9E-03 1.1E-04 1.11E-04 Indeno 1,2,3cd cone 1.8E+01 5.0E-07 2.8E-08 3.4E-05 1.9E-06 5.2E-05 2.9E-06 8.8E-06 4.9E-07 2.4E-03 1.4E-04 1.41E-04 Pyrene 1.8E+01 1.3E-06 7.2E-08 8.7E-05 4.8E-06 1.3E-04 7.2E-06 5.2E-06 2.9E-07 1.3E-04 7.0E-06 1.94E-05 TOTAL HPAH HQ = 1.20E-03 TOTAL PAH HQ = 1.21E-03 Pesticides DDD , '-DDD 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 1.8E-05 1.2E-04 2.9E-05 2.0E-04 1.0E-05 6.8E-05 7.3E-04 5.0E-03 5.38E-03 DDD, o,p'- 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 1.4E-05 9.3E-05 2.2E-05 1.5E-04 7.6E-06 5.2E-05 2.4E-04 1.7E-03 1.96E-03 DDD, o, '-+ DDD, , '- 1.5E-01 I 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 2.2E-05 1.5E-04 3.4E-05 2.3E-04 1.2E-05 8.2E-05 7.3E-04 5.0E-03 5.45E-03 DDE (p,p'-DDE) 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 3.4E-05 2.3E-04 5.3E-05 3.6E-04 1.8E-05 1.2E-04 2.2E-03 1.5E-02 1.57E-02 DDE, o,p- 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 6.8E-06 4.7E-05 1.1E-05 7.6E-05 3.8E-06 2.6E-05 2.4E-04 1.7E-03 1.81E-03 DDE, o, '-+ DDE, , '- 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 3.4E-05 2.3E-04 5.3E-05 3.6E-04 1.8E-05 1.3E-04 2.2E-03 1.5E-02 1.57E-02 DDT , '-DD 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 1.2E-05 8.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.4E-04 6.3E-06 4.3E-05 2.4E-04 1.7E-03 1.93E-03 DDT, o,p'- 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 6.8E-06 4.7E-05 1.1E-05 7.6E-05 3.5E-06 2.4E-05 2.4E-04 I 1.7E-03 1.81E-03 DDT, o, '-+ DDT, p, '- 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 1.2E-05 8.5E-05 2.0E-05 1.4E-04 6.3E-06 4.3E-05 2.4E-04 1.7E-03 1.93E-03 DDT + Metabolites 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 6.8E-05 I 4.6E-04 1.0E-04 7.0E-04 3.5E-05 2.4E-04 2.9E-03 2.0E-02 2.13E-02 DDT Total 1.5E-01 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 1.5E-04 1.1E-03 2.3E-04 1.5E-03 7.9E-05 5.4E-04 2.9E-03 2.0E-02 2.31E-02 Inorganics Manganese 5.2E+01 5.7E-03 1.1E-04 1.8E-01 3.4E -031.6E-01 3.0E-03 4.3E-01 8.4E-03 1.9E-02 3.7E-04 1.53E-02 Zinc 7.6E+01 2.5E-03 3.3E-05 1.6E-01 2.2E-03 1.8E+00 2.4E-02 9.8E+00 1.3E-01 1.6E+00 2.2E-02 1.76E-01 Page 16 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec 6.4 RIVER OTTER APPENDIX H ERA Inputs and Calculations Constituent Reference Toxicity Dose (mg/kg -day) f*ae rage Daily Dose ;mg/kg -day) Surface Water Ingestion HQ Average Daily Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Sediment Ingestion HQ Average Dally Dose (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Average Daily Aquatic Plant Dose Ingestion HQ (mg/kg -day) Freshwater Ber Invertebrate Ingestion HQ Average Daily Freshwater Fish DOS Ingestion HQ (mg/kg -day) Total Hazard Quotient Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Low Molecular Weight PAI -Is Acenaphthene 1.7E+02 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 2.6E-07 1.5E-09 3.0E-08 1.7E-10 1.6E-06 9.6E-09 1.15E-08 Acenaphthylene 1.7E+02 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 2.6E-07 1.5E-09 2.9E-08 1.7E-10 2.1E-06 1.2E-08 1.40E-08 Anthracene 1.7E+02 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 4.7E-07 2.8E-09 5.2E-08 3.1E-10 6.5E-06 3.8E-08 4.15E-08 Fluoranthene 1.7E+02 9.0E-08 5.3E-10 1.2E-06 7.0E-09 1.3E-07 7.4E-10 5.8E-05 3.4E-07 3.47E-07 Fluorene 1.7E+02 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 2.6E-07 1.5E-09 2.9E-08 1.7E-10 3.3E-06 1.9E-08 2.10E-08 1 -Methylnaphthalene 1.7E+02 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 2.7E-07 1.6E-09 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 1.5E-06 9.0E-09 1.10E-08 2 -Methylnaphthalene 1.7E+02 7.0E-08 4.1E-10 3.4E-07 2.0E-09 3.9E-08 2.3E-10 3.3E-06 1.9E-08 2.19E-08 Naphthalene 1.7E+02 9.6E-08 5.6E-10 2.6E-07 1.5E-09 3.1E-08 1.8E-10 1.2E-06 7.2E-09 9.50E-09 Phenanthrene 1.7E+02 3.2E-08 1.9E-10 6.7E-07 3.9E-09 7.3E-08 4.3E-10 6.5E-06 3.8E-08 4.28E-08 TOTAL LPAH HQ = 5.20E-07 High Molecular Weight PAHs Benz(a)anthracene 1.8E+01 8.3E-08 4.6E-09 4.8E-07 2.7E-08 4.8E-08 2.6E-09 2.7E-04 1.5E-05 1.49E-05 Benzo(a)pyrene 1.8E+01 9.6E-08 5.3E-09 4.7E-07 2.6E-08 2.3E-07 1.3E-08 6.2E-04 3.4E-05 3.43E-05 Benzob uoranthene 1.8E+01 1.3E-07 7.1E-09 7.6E-07 4.2E-08 7.3E-08 4.1E-09 1.1E-03 6.1E-05 6.09E-05 Benzo ,h,i a lene 1.8E+01 3.2E-08 1.8E-09 3.9E-07 2.1E-08 1.8E-07 9.9E-09 6.5E-04 3.6E-05 3.62E-05 Benzo Buoranthene 1.8E+01 1.3E-07 7.1E-09 7.6E-07 4.2E-08 3.6E-07 2.0E-08 2.2E-03 1.2E-04 1.20E-04 Benzo k uoranthene 1.8E+01 3.2E-08 1.8E-09 2.9E-07 1.6E-08 2.8E-08 1.5E-09 2.6E-04 1.4E-05 1.44E-05 Ch Bene 1.8E+01 9.0E-08 5.0E-09 5.7E-07 3.2E-08 5.7E-08 3.2E-09 2.9E-04 1.6E-05 1.61E-05 Dibenz a,h nthracene 1.8E+01 3.2E-08 1.8E-09 2.6E-07 1.4E-08 1.2E-07 6.6E-09 6.5E-04 3.6E-05 3.62E-05 Indeno 1,2,3cd cone 1.8E+01 3.2E-08 1.8E-09 3.8E-07 2.1E-08 1.7E-07 9.6E-09 8.2E-04 4.6E-05 4.55E-05 Pyrene 1.8E+01 8.3E-08 4.6E-09 9.7E-07 5.4E-08 1.0E-07 5.8E-09 4.2E-05 2.4E-06 2.43E-06 TOTAL HPAH HQ = 3.81 E-04 TOTAL PAH HQ = 3.82E-04 Pesticides DDD , '-DDD 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 2.1E-07 1.4E-06 2.0E-07 1.4E-06 2.5E-04 1.7E-03 1.68E-03 DDD, o,p'- 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 1.5E-07 1.0E-06 1.5E-07 1.0E-06 8.2E-05 5.6E-04 5.61E-04 DDD, o, '-+ DDD, , '- 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 2.5E-07 1.7E-06 2.4E-07 1.6E-06 2.5E-04 1.7E-03 1.68E-03 DDE (p,p'-DDE) 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 3.9E-07 2.6E-06 3.6E-07 2.4E-06 7.4E-04 5.0E-03 5.03E-03 DDE, o,p- 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 7.7E-08 5.2E-07 7.4E-08 5.1E-07 8.2E-05 5.6E-04 5.60E-04 DDE, o, '-+ DDE, 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 3.9E-07 2.6E-06 3.7E-07 2.5E-06 7.4E-04 5.0E-03 5.03E-03 DDT , '-DD 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 1.4E-07 9.5E-07 1.2E-07 8.5E-07 8.2E-05 5.6E-04 5.60E-04 DDT, o,p'- 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 7.7E-08 5.2E-07 6.9E-08 4.7E-07 8.2E-05 5.6E-04 5.60E-04 DDT, o, '-+ DDT, p, p'- 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1E-07 1.4E-07 9.5E-07 1.3E-07 8.5E-07 8.2E-05 5.6E-04 5.60E-04 DDT + Metabolites 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1 1.1E-07 7.6E-07 5.2E-06 6.8E-07 4.7E-06 9.9E-04 6.7E-03 6.71E-03 DDT Total 1.5E-01 1.6E-08 1.1 E-07 1.7E-06 1.2E-05 1.6E-06 1.1 E-05 9.9E-04 6.7E-03 6.73E-03 Inorganics Manganese 5.2E+01 3.7E-04 7.1E-06 2.0E-03 3.9E-05 8.5E-03 1.7E-04 6.4E-03 1.2E-04 3.36E-04 Zinc 7.6E+01 1.6E-04 2.1E-06 1.9E-03 2.4E-05 1.9E-01 2.5E-03 5.5E-01 7.2E-03 9.81E-03 Page 17 Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix I Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA September 11, 2015 Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA ® Stantec Limited Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment - Aquatic Lot Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour C�Stantec Prepared for: Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 1331 Clyde Ave., Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 FINAL Project No. 122511075.200 September 11, 2015 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................... 1.0 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1.1 1.1 GENERAL.........................................................................................................................1.1 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................... 1.1 1.2.1 Subject Property and Surrounding Land Use ........................................... 1.1 3.2 1.2.2 Previous Reports........................................................................................... 1.2 1.3 PHYSICAL SETTING.......................................................................................................... 1.4 3.3 1.3.1 Regional Stratigraphy................................................................................. 1.4 1.3.2 Topography and Drainage........................................................................ 1.4 1.3.3 Site Services.................................................................................................. 1.4 1.4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK.......................................................................................... 1.5 1.4.1 Federal..........................................................................................................1.5 1.5 SCOPE OF WORK........................................................................................................... 1.6 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION..................................................................................................2.1 2.1 METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................2.1 2.1.1 Deviations in the Scope of Work............................................................... 2.2 2.2 LABORATORY ANALYTICAL PROGRAM.......................................................................2.2 3.0 RESULTS........................................................................................................................3.3 3.1 SEDIMENT.........................................................................................................................3.3 3.1.1 Sediment Analytical Results....................................................................... 3.3 3.1.2 Waste Classification Results........................................................................ 3.5 3.2 SURFACE WATER.............................................................................................................3.5 3.2.1 Surface Water Analytical Results............................................................... 3.5 3.3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS................................................................................................3.7 3.3.1 Sediment.......................................................................................................3.7 3.3.2 Surface Water.............................................................................................. 3.7 3.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL.................................................................. 3.7 4.0 LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................4.1 5.0 SIGNATURES................................................................................................................5.2 LIST OF TABLES Table 3-1: Sediment PAH Exceedances..................................................... Table 3-2: Sediment OCP Exceedances.................................................... Table 3-3: Surface Water Metal and General Inorganic Exceedances Table B-1 Summary of Backpack Electrofishing Effort .............................. Table B-2 Summary of Gill Netting Effort ..................................................... ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx ........................... 3.4 ........................... 3.4 ........................... 3.5 ........................... B.4 ........................... B.4 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A FIGURES.....................................................................................................A.1 APPENDIX B FIELD METHODOLOGY.............................................................................. B.1 APPENDIX C SUMMARY ANALYTICAL TABLES...............................................................C.1 APPENDIX D LICENCE TO COLLECT FISH....................................................................... D.1 APPENDIX E LABORATORY CERTIFICATES OF ANALYSES..............................................E.1 ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uatic_esa_fn I.docx LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to conduct a site specific human health and ecological risk assessment (SSRA) of contaminated sediment, with remedial and/or risk management option analysis and development of a remedial action plan, at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario. A limited supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted at the Site in support of the SSRA. The Site is currently owned by DFO and is used as a recreational and commercial fishing access point, community wharf and harbour of refuge. There is one vacant Canadian Coast Guard automation building on the Site, located southwest of the harbour. In March and May 2015 Stantec completed a limited supplemental Phase II ESA to collect sediment and surface water data to delineate (if possible) and support a detailed and more accurate assessment of the human and ecological risks at the Site. In addition, a benthic invertebrate study and fish collection survey were conducted. These results are reported under separate cover. The applicable sediment guidelines for the Site are: • Canadian Council of the Ministers of Environment (CCME), Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guideline, on-line summary accessed in May 2015. The applicable surface water guidelines for the Site are: • CCME, Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life - Freshwater, on-line summary accessed in May 2015. The scope of work for the Phase II ESA consisted of advancing three sediment cores, and collecting sediment samples from each core at regular intervals. Surface sediment samples were collected from 12 additional locations, and all sediment samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes (BTEX), petroleum hydrocarbon fractions F1 to F4 (PHCs F1 to F4), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), metals and general inorganics, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) and pH. Two blind duplicate samples for sediment were submitted. One composite sediment sample was collected for waste characterization for potential future sediment management. In total, 18 sediment samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of the contaminants of concern (including two field duplicate sediment sample collected from SID 15-14 and SD 15-02 (called QCSD15-01 and QCSD15-02, respectively). ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 Surface water samples and benthic invertebrate samples were collected from the same 15 sampling locations as the sediment samples. The surface water samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of BTEX, PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, TKN, pH and hardness. One blind duplicate sample was submitted for surface water. Trip and field blanks were submitted for laboratory analysis of BTEX, PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics. In total, 16 surface water samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of the contaminants of concern (including one field duplicate sample collected from SWI 5-01 (QC -SW -1 5-01). The measured concentrations of the contaminants of concern were below the applicable guidelines in all of the sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis, with the exception of of acenaphthylene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, phenanthrene, and pyrene in SD15-02-COMP5,6, and concentrations of DDD (p,p'-DDD), DDE (p,p'-DDE), and DDT (p,p'-DDT) in several samples, which exceeded CCME guidelines. The measured concentrations of the contaminants of concern were below the applicable guidelines in the surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis, with the exception of aluminum, iron, molybdenum, and zinc, which exceeded the CCME guidelines in several samples. Fish tissue samples were collected (10 from background/reference locations and 10 from Big Otter Creek and its confluence with Lake Erie) and submitted for laboratory analysis of PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics. In total, 15 benthic invertebrate samples were submitted for taxonomic identification, and 21 fish tissue samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of the contaminants of concern. These sediment, surface water, benthic invertebrate and fish tissue results are further assessed in the SSRA. The statements made in this Executive Summary text are subject to the limitations included in Section 4 and are to be read in conjunction with the remainder of this report. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 LU INIKUUU(..l 1.1 GENERAL Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) was retained by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to conduct a site specific human health and ecological risk assessment (SSRA) of contaminated sediment, with remedial and/or risk management option analysis and development of a remedial action plan, at the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (SCH) (the "Site") in Port Burwell, Ontario. A limited supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted at the Site in support of the SSRA. A key plan illustrating the Site location is provided on Figure No. 1 (Appendix A). The Site is currently owned by DFO and is used as a recreational and commercial fishing access point, community wharf and harbour of refuge. There is one vacant Canadian Coast Guard automation building on the Site, located southwest of the harbour. In February and May 2015 Stantec completed a limited supplemental Phase II ESA to collect additional sediment and surface water data to delineate (if possible) and support a detailed and more accurate assessment of the human and ecological risks at the Site. In addition, a benthic invertebrate study and fish collection survey were conducted; these are reported under separate cover 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION 1.2.1 Subject Property and Surrounding Land Use The Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (SCH) is located at the confluence of Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie in Port Burwell, Ontario (see Figure 1, Appendix A). The Site encompasses an area of approximately 78 hectares (ha) and includes land and waterlots in Big Otter Creek and Lake Erie. Owing to the absence of residential structures, the fact that the area is open to unrestricted public access, and historical uses, the land use for the Site is commercial. The Site is currently used as a recreational and commercial fishing access point, community wharf and harbour of refuge. From the early 1900s to the mid 1970s, the Site was used as a small fishing wharf. In the 1970s, it was expanded to accommodate shipment of commodities including coal, potash, fuel oil and fertilizer. Bulk materials were stored on both sides of the harbour. Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) tracks served the dock for the rail car ferry/bulk carrier Ashtabula on the east side of the harbour, and a 2.7 million litre capacity bulk fuel tank that received product by boat was located on the west side of the harbour. By 1973, commercial harbour traffic had ceased with transfer of bulk goods service to nearby Port Stanley, leaving just the west side bulk fuel oil tank. Since then, it has operated as a recreational and commercial vessel harbour. There is currently one vacant Canadian Coast Guard building on the Site, located southwest of the harbour, which has been classified as a Contaminated Site. An assessment conducted by SNC in 2015 concluded that the Site can be considered for closure following demolition of the building, and no further action was required. Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_porf_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) identifies the Port Burwell property as Directory of Federal Real Property (DFRP) Property Number 54022. The TBS notes that there are 10 Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory (FCSI) identifiers for the property. The current Site is identified as FCSI 00024432. Lands to the east and west include private and publically-owned properties, including Port Burwell Provincial Park to the west, which includes a campground and sandy beach for recreation and swimming. Big Otter Creek extends to the north and Lake Erie extends to the south. A key plan is provided on Figure No. 1, Appendix A. A more detailed plan is provided on Figure No. 2, Appendix A. Previous assessments conducted at the Site include the following, which are summarized below. • Enhanced Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Site No. 4766, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated March 2001, completed by MacViro Consultants Inc. • Assessment of Environmental Risks for Municipality of Bayham at Port Burwell, report dated March 2012, completed by Stantec Consulting Ltd. • Phase 1/11 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated July 10, 2013, completed by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. Enhanced Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Site No. 4766, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated March 2001, completed by MacViro Consultants Inc. MacViro Consultants Inc. (MacViro) was retained by the Ontario Region of Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), on behalf of DFO, to carry out an Enhanced Phase I ESA of the Port Burwell SCH in the Village of Port Burwell, Ontario. The Enhanced Phase I ESA consisted of a site reconnaissance visit, historical records review and analytical testing of sediment and soil samples. Observations made during the Enhanced Phase I ESA revealed minor concerns. One soil sample taken from the beach property revealed concentrations of metals that were below the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) and Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) guidelines. However, four of six sediment samples revealed concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), metals, and OCPs that exceeded the CCME Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guidelines (ISQGs) and the MOECC Guidelines for the Protection and Management of Aquatic Sediment Quality in Ontario (PSQGs; August 1993) Lowest Effect Level (LEL). ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 1.2 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 The Enhanced Phase I ESA indicated areas on the property where concentrations of metals, nutrients, pesticides, and PAHs in sediment exceeded the LELs in the PSQGs and/or the ISQGs in the CCME Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines (CEQGs). Such contamination poses potential problems for future activities on the property, such as dredging. It was recommended that concentrations of contaminants in the sediment be compared to background sediment concentrations on the SCH property and that the extent of the sediment concentration exceedances be delineated. Assessment of Environmental Risks for Municipality of Bayham at Port Burwell, report dated March 2012, completed by Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec Consulting Ltd. was retained in 2011 by the Municipality of Bayham (that includes Port Burwell) to assess environmental risks associated with the property, in advance of the potential property transfer of federal lands at the harbour to the municipality. This assessment was based upon a review of background information and reports readily available from the Municipality and other sources. This study was not intended to meet the requirements of a Phase I ESA under CAN/CSAZ768-01 or Ontario Regulation 153/04, and was intended to be an historical review. Gaps in critical information were identified within the available information, leading Stantec to recommend a Phase I and a Phase II ESA to assess soil, groundwater and sediment quality to close the information gaps. It was determined that an assessment of environmental risks must take into consideration risks to the Municipality in assuming the federal lands based on known environmental impacts from currently available documents, and from unknown environmental impacts that might be identified during a Phase I and Phase II ESA. However, a full risk assessment could not be completed until the gaps in critical information were closed. Phase 1/11 Environmental Site Assessment, Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour, Port Burwell, Ontario, report dated July 10, 2013, completed by Terrapex Environmental Ltd. Terrapex Environmental Ltd. (Terrapex) was retained by PWGSC on behalf of DFO to conduct a Phase 1/11 ESA at the DFO Port Burwell SCH located in Port Burwell, Ontario. The Phase I ESA identified three Areas of Potential Environmental Concern (APECs) and chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) at each APEC including petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs), metals/inorganics, nutrients, PAHs, OCPs, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and soil pH issues. As part of the Phase II ESA, three borehole sampling locations were drilled at APEC 1 and monitoring wells were installed to assess near -surface and subsurface conditions in APEC 1. Potential impacts at the Site associated with sources of potential contamination identified in APEC 2 and APEC 3 were also investigated. Additionally, three surficial sediment cores were advanced in Big Otter Creek to collect surficial and subsurface sediment samples. Three additional surficial sediment cores were collected adjacent to APEC 1, as well as from outside the study area to determine background sediment conditions at the Site. COPCs in APEC 1 included PHC F2 to F4, select PAHs, metals/inorganics and OCPs. COPCs exceeded the CCME Soil Quality Guidelines, CCME ISQGs, CCME Probable Effect Level, Canadian Water Quality Guideline for the Protection of Aquatic Life Freshwater, MOECC Lowest Effect Level, and the Canadian Federal Interim Groundwater Quality Guideline. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 1.3 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 Terrapex recommended that a Preliminary Quantitative Risk Assessment (PARA) and Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment (SLERA) be conducted to further assess the COPCs in contaminated soil and groundwater on the land. They also recommended that a Detailed Level Risk Assessment (DLRA), benthic invertebrate survey and toxicological assessment of the impacted sediment be conducted in the inner harbour of the Port Burwell SCH. 1.3 PHYSICAL SETTING Surficial soils in the general area are till and glaciolacustrine deposits consisting predominantly of silt and clay and minor sand, which include basin and quiet water deposits (MacViro, 2001). Bedrock in the vicinity of the Site is described as being of the Middle Devonian Era, specifically the Dundee Formation which consists of limestone, dolostone, and shale. 1.3.2 Topography and Drainage As described in the Enhanced Phase I ESA conducted by MacViro (2001), the topography of the land portion of the Site is as follows: • Relatively flat with a slight slope towards Lake Erie. The Site is predominantly a water lot. • General direction of groundwater flow is assumed to be towards Big Otter Creek, while groundwater flow at the southern portion of the Site is expected to be to the south, towards Lake Erie. 1.3.3 Site Servir The Site is serviced with drinking water by the Municipality of Bayham (Terrapex, 2013). Therefore, Site groundwater was categorized as being non -potable. According to the 2012 Assessment of Environmental Risks Report prepared by Stantec, the harbour provides privately operated dockage and marina services to recreational and commercial fishing vessels, and is also a possible harbour of refuge for vessels in danger on Lake Erie. The turning basin has filled in along the west pier wall since the routine or scheduled dredging of the accumulating sediment load from Big Otter Creek has ceased. Dredging of sediment from the harbour was last completed in 2012 as part of Project Ojibwa. The CPR locomotive turn table at the foot of Wellington Street in the east harbour, and the bulk fuel tank site near the end of Chatham Street in the west harbour remain visible today. Although these features are not on the Subject Lands, they are in close proximity. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 1.4 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 1.4 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK The Site is currently federal property (owned by Department of Fisheries and Oceans) with the future intent of divestment of the Site to the Municipality of Bayham. However, at this time federal guidelines would apply in evaluating the extent of impacted sediment and surface water. The regulatory framework used to evaluate and compare the sediment quality data were: • Canadian Council of the Ministers of Environment (CCME), Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guideline, on-line summary accessed in May 2015. The regulatory frameworks used to evaluate and compare the surface water quality data were: • CCME, Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life - Freshwater, on-line summary accessed in May 2015. 1 4,1 Fpl1prcl 1.4.1.1 Sediment The interim sediment quality guidelines (ISQG) provide reference points for evaluating the potential for adverse biological effects within aquatic systems from available toxicological information derived by CCME established protocols. These guidelines act to synthesize information regarding the relationship between sediment concentrations of chemicals and adverse biological effects. The sediment laboratory results were compared to the Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guideline to provide protection of freshwater life. 1.4.1.2 Surface Water The Canadian water quality guidelines are intended to provide protection of freshwater and marine life from human influence (i.e., chemical dumping or changes to pH, temperature etc.). Specifically, the CCME Water Quality Guidelines are provided to protect freshwater or marine life from chemical changes to the environment. As the Site is situated in Ontario on Lake Erie, Stantec compared the surface water results to the freshwater pathway. The surface water laboratory results were compared to the CCME Canadian Environmental Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, on-line summary tables accessed May 2015. As the Site is considered non -potable, the surface water results were not compared to Health Canada's Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 1.5 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Introduction September 11, 2015 1.5 SCOPE OF WORK The following scope of work for the supplemental sampling program was presented in Stantec's Proposal No. FP802-140286 to DFO dated December 5, 2014. The scope is generally based on the requirements of the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (A National Standard of Canada (reaffirmed 2008)), CAN/CSA-Z769-00, March 2000. The program was completed also in accordance with the MOE Guidance on Sampling and Analytical Methods for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario (December 1996). The Phase II ESA program included the following scope of work: • Advance three sediment cores to a depth of approximately 7.5 metres below the water surface, to delineate COPCs found during previous investigations. Collect samples in approximately 1.5 metres intervals from each core and submit for laboratory analysis of petroleum hydrocarbon fractions F1 to F4 (PHCs F1 to F4), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), metals and general inorganics, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) and pH. • Collect 12 surface sediment samples (seven Site samples and five background/ reference samples) to delineate COPCs found during previous site investigations, in support of the SSRA. Submit samples for laboratory analysis of PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, TKN and pH. • Collect and submit 15 surface water samples and submit for laboratory analysis of PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, TKN, pH and hardness. Locations of samples are to be co -located with the sediment samples. • Collect 15 benthic invertebrate grab samples and submit for taxonomic identification co - located with the sediment samples for chemistry. • Collect 20 fish samples, 10 from background/reference locations, and 10 from Big Otter Creek and/or its confluence with Lake Erie. Submit fish tissue samples for laboratory analysis of PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics. • Collect one sediment sample for landfill disposal characterization analyses. • Submit two blind duplicate samples for sediment and two blind duplicate samples for surface water. • Submit one trip and field blank for laboratory analysis of PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, and TKN. • Provide a written report summarizing the sampling work program undertaken, results obtained and conclusions/recommendations (this report). ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 1.6 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Field Investigation September 11, 2015 2.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION 2.1 METHODOLOGY Stantec personnel were on Site from March 9 to March 17, 2015, to conduct the field sampling program including sediment coring and sediment, surface water, and benthic invertebrate sampling activities. Stantec personnel returned to the Site from May 19 to May 21, 2015, to collect fish tissue and additional surface water samples. Prior to commencing any field activities, coring locations were cleared of underground services through consultation with a private utility locate company as well as public utility locate services. Three deep sediment cores were drilled by Strata Drilling Group (Strata) using a Pionjar 120 Drilling System equipped with sampling equipment to assess the sediment conditions. Sediment samples were collected from the boreholes at regular depth intervals using a standard 2" diameter, 30" long split spoon sampler. Stantec personnel visually classified and logged the subsurface conditions encountered within each of the sediment cores at the time of the field work. In addition to sediment core samples, 12 surface sediment samples, 15 surface water samples, and 15 benthic invertebrate samples were collected from Big Otter Creek and background/ reference locations in Lake Erie. Surface water and benthic invertebrate samples were co - located with sediment core and surface sediment sampling locations. Fish tissues samples were collected from Big Otter Creek and its confluence with Lake Erie, as well as from nearby background/reference locations. Fish were collected using gill nets and a backpack electrofisher from a boat. The sediment and surface water samples were collected in accordance with the protocols established by the Canadian Standards Association's Guideline Z769-00 Phase II Environmental Site Assessments and standard industry practices to ensure that all data collected is of high quality and is representative of site conditions. The UTM co-ordinates of all sampling locations were obtained using a GPS unit accurate horizontally to 10 cm. The sediment and surface water laboratory results were then compared against the applicable federal guidelines. As federal guidelines for fish tissue are limited to the protection of wildlife consumers of aquatic biota, these laboratory results are assessed in the SSRA report. The method for this scope of work is further detailed in Appendix B. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 2.1 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Field Investigation September 11, 2015 2. 1 J deviations in the Scope of Work The following are deviations to the sampling rationale provided in Stantec's sample plan: • Due to adverse weather conditions (i.e., freezing over of the creek), the field work that was scheduled to be completed from a boat was instead completed on ice. Sediment, surface water, and benthic invertebrate samples were collected from under ice. • In additional to the COPCs listed in the proposal, sediment and surface water samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of BTEX. This was completed in order to provide a line of evidence whether BTEX and PHC impacts in soil and groundwater from the terrestrial portion of the Site were affecting sediment and surface water. • Surface water samples were additionally submitted for laboratory analysis of PCBs. • Due to a laboratory error, five of the 16 surface water samples collected in March 2015 were placed on hold until the samples expired. These surface water samples were recollected from the same locations during Phase 2 of the field program in May 2015. 2.2 LABORATORY ANALYTICAL PROGRAM The sediment, surface water, and fish tissue samples were submitted for laboratory analysis to Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario. Maxxam is accredited to ISO/IEC 17025, the International Quality Standard for laboratories for the required analytical methods, and employs in-house quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) programs to govern sample analysis, including the analyses of method blanks, spiked blanks, and the analyses of duplicates (10%) for each sample batch. In total, 18 sediment samples were submitted for laboratory analysis and were analyzed for BTEX, PHCs Fl to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, TKN and pH. One sediment sample was submitted for analysis of inorganics, BTEX and PHCs Fl to F4, volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi -volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and flashpoint in either bulk sediment or the leachate. Two of the 18 samples submitted, QCSD15-01 and QCSD15-02, were field duplicate sediment samples collected concurrently with parent samples SID 15-14 and SDI 5-02, respectively. In total, 16 surface water samples were collected from the Site and submitted for laboratory analysis of BTEX, PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, TKN, pH and hardness. One of the 16 surface water samples (QC -SW -15-01) was a field duplicate sample collected from SW -15-01. One trip blank and one field blank were also requested from the laboratory that accompanied the surface water samples to the Site and back to the lab. The trip blank and field blank were analysed for BTEX, PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, and TKN. In total, 21 fish tissue samples were submitted for laboratory analysis and were analyzed for OCPs and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), metals and general inorganics, and moisture. The laboratory analytical results are presented within the SSRA. (3 Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 2.2 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 Laboratory certificates of analysis were revised as Maxxam inadvertently reported parameters that had not been requested, and also omitted some parameters that had been requested. RESULTS The analytical results for sediment and surface water are presented below. The results of the benthic invertebrate analysis are reported under separate cover. The analytical results collected from the fish tissue samples submitted for laboratory analysis of contaminants of concern are further discussed within the SSRA report. 3.1 SEDIMENT 3.1.1 Sediment Analytical Results The analytical results collected from the on-site sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis of the contaminants of concern were compared to the CCME, Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guideline. Summary analytical results are presented in Table C-1 in Appendix C. Laboratory Certificates of Analysis are provided in Appendix D. 3.1.1.1 Petroleum Hydrocarbons (1`1 to F4) Concentrations of PHCs analysed in the 18 sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis were either non -detect or just above the detection limit. There are no CCME sediment guidelines for PHC F1 to F4. 3.1.1.2 Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes (BTEX) Concentrations of BTEX analysed in the 18 sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis were either non -detect. There are no CCME sediment guidelines for BTEX. 3.1.1.3 Metals and General Inorganics Measured concentrations of the metal and general inorganics parameters analysed in the 18 sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis were less than the applicable guidelines. 3.1.1.4 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Measured concentrations of PAHs analysed in the 18 sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis were less than the applicable guidelines, with the exception of concentrations of parameters in Table 3-1 below. Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 3.3 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 Table 3-1: Sediment PAH Exceedances . . S D 15-02- COMP5,6 L- Acenaphthylene Benzo(a)anthracene Benzo(a)pyrene Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Phenanthrene Pyrene 3.1.1.5 Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs) Measured concentrations of OCPs analysed in the 18 sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis were less than the applicable guidelines, with the exception of concentrations of parameters in Table 3-2 below. Table 3-2: Sediment OCP Exceedances Location. . SD15-01 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD 15-02 COMP3,4 DDE (p,p'-DDE) S D 15-02 COMP5,6 DDD (p,p'-DDD) DDE (p,p'-DDE) DDT (p,p'-DDT) S D 15-03 COMP1,2,3 DDE (p,p'-DDE) S D 15-03 COMP4,5 DDE (p,p'-DDE) S D 15-03 COMP6,7 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD15-04 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD15-05 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD15-06 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD15-07 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD15-08 DDE (p,p'-DDE) DDT (p,p'-DDT) SD15-09 DDE (p,p'-DDE) SD15-10 DDE (p,p'-DDE) ® Stantec v:\01225\active\122511075\reports\ra\final\app_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_ burwell_aquatic_esa_fnl.docx 3.4 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 4.1.2 Waste Classification Results A composite sediment sample was collected for laboratory analysis of waste classification parameters. Waste classification analyses of the composite sediment sample was completed in accordance with the Ontario Environmental Protection Act, Regulation 347, General - Waste Management, as amended, and compared to the leachate criteria provided in Schedule 4 of the regulation. The analysis indicated that the sediment is not leachate toxic (i.e., it is non- hazardous) and therefore can be disposed at a local MOE-approved non -hazardous solid waste landfill. The waste classification results are presented in Table C-3 in Appendix C. Laboratory Certificates of Analysis are provided in Appendix D. 3.2 SURFACE WATER 3.1 11 !;tjrfn(-p Wntpr Analytic of Results The analytical results collected from the on-site surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis were compared to the CCME, Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, for Freshwater, on-line summary accessed in May 2015. Summary analytical results are presented in Table C-2 in Appendix C and the Laboratory Certificates of Analysis are provided in Appendix D. 3.2.1.1 Petroleum Hydrocarbons (F1 to F4) Concentrations of PHCs analysed in the 16 surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis were all non -detect. There are no CCME surface water guidelines for PHC F1 to F4. 3.2.1.2 Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylenes (BTEX) Measured concentrations of BTEX analysed in the 16 surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis were less than the applicable guidelines. 3.2.1.3 Metals and General Inorganics Measured concentrations of the metal and general inorganics parameters analysed in the 18 sediment sediment samples submitted for laboratory analysis were less than the applicable guidelines/standards, with the exception of concentrations of parameters in Table 3-3 below. Table 3-3: Surface Water Metal and General Inorganic Exceedances Aluminum SW15-01 Iron Aluminum QC -SW -15-01 Iron Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 3.5 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 Locaflon Parameter SW15-02 Aluminum Iron S W 15-03 Aluminum Iron Zinc SW15-04 Aluminum Iron S W 15-05 Aluminum Iron Zinc SW15-06 Aluminum S W 15-07 Aluminum Iron S W 15-08 Aluminum Iron S W 15-09 Aluminum Iron SW15-10 Aluminum Iron SWI 5-11 Aluminum Iron SW 15-12 Aluminum Iron Molybdenum Zinc SW15-13 Aluminum Iron Molybdenum SW15-14 Aluminum Iron SW15-15 Aluminum Iron 3.2.1.4 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) Measured concentrations of PAHs analysed in the 16 surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis were less than the applicable guidelines. 3.2.1.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Concentrations of PCBs analysed in the 16 surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis were all non -detect. There are no CCME surface water guidelines for PCBs. Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 3.6 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 3.2.1.6 Organochlorine Pesticides (OCPs) Measured concentrations of OCPs analysed in the 16 surface water samples submitted for laboratory analysis were all non -detect. 3.3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 3.3.1 Sedimem As noted in Section 3.1, concentration of acenaphthylene, benzo(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, phenanthrene, and pyrene in SD15-02-COMP5,6, and concentrations of DDD (p,p'-DDD), DDE (p,p'-DDE), and DDT (p,p'-DDT) in several samples (see Table 3-2) exceeded the CCME, Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guideline for sediment (Table C-1 in Appendix C). These exceedances in sediment are assessed as part of the SSRA. 3.3.2 3urtaee 'vvater As noted in Section 3.2, concentrations of aluminum, iron, molybdenum and zinc in several surface water samples (see Table 3-3) exceeded the CCME, Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, for Freshwater (Table C-2 in Appendix C). These exceedances in surface water are assessed as part of the SSRA. 3.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL Blind duplicates are submitted for laboratory analysis to evaluate both laboratory precision and the implemented field sampling and handling procedures, in addition to the sample homogeneity. The relative percent difference (RPD) is defined as the absolute value of the variation between a sample and its duplicate, when compared to the average concentration of the original and the duplicate. It is used to assess the validity of the field and laboratory analytical procedures. Trip blanks are laboratory prepared samples that are transported to the site in the same shipping containers used for the transport of the collected surface water samples. The analysis of trip blanks is completed to determine if sample shipping or storage procedures have possibly influenced the analytical results. Field blanks are samples prepared in the field to evaluate the potential impact of ambient site conditions on the analytical results. Laboratory containers were filled with laboratory supplied organic free water on-site to determine if any ambient site conditions would impact the laboratory results. Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 3.7 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 The relative percent difference (RPD) is used to evaluate sample result variability for duplicate samples and is calculated by the following equation: RPD = rIS1S3S2IJ x 100 where: RPD = relative percent difference S1 =original sample concentration S2 = duplicate sample concentration S3 = average concentration = (S1 + S2)/2 RPD values are not used to evaluate those compounds that are present at concentrations less than five times the reportable detection limit (RDL). There are no firm guidelines for the degree of correlation expected between duplicates due to natural heterogeneity in sediment and contaminant distribution. However, the laboratory data is considered to indicate an acceptable duplicate correlation. Acceptable Relative Percent Difference (RPD) limits are considered to be 100% for sediment (all parameters), 50% for metals in water, and 80% for organics in water. Sediment Based on the Maxxam Analytics Inc. QA/QC Interpretation Guide, a blind field duplicate has limited use for samples that cannot be homogenized (i.e., VOCs). Also, the RPD calculation is only applicable when concentrations in the sample and its field duplicate are greater than five times the laboratory reportable detection limit (RDL). Finally, the QA/QC Interpretation Guide specifies that the recommended RPD values for samples and their duplicates should be less than or equal to 100% RPD to ensure consistencies in laboratory and field procedures, and sample homogeneity. Two blind field duplicate sediment samples were recovered, one from SID 15-14 (called QCSD15- 01) and one from SID 15-02 (called QCSD15-02). Both field duplicate samples were submitted for laboratory analysis of PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics, and TKN. The RPD values calculated for SID 15-14 and duplicate QCSD15-01 ranged from 0 to 47%, which are within the acceptable limit of 100%. Therefore the calculated RPDs for this sediment sample pairing do not suggest inconsistencies in the field collection or the laboratory analysis methods. The RPD values calculated for SD 15-02 and duplicate QCSD15-02 ranged from 0 to 159%. However, as only two parameters, fluoranthene and pyrene, exceeded the acceptable limit of 100%, the calculated RPDs for this sediment sample pairing do not suggest inconsistencies in the field collection or the laboratory analysis methods. Rather, the difference is likely due to sediment heterogeneity. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 3.8 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Results September 11, 2015 Surface Water RPDs were calculated for the surface water samples collected from SW 15-01 and its duplicates QC -SW -15-01; the samples were recovered simultaneously. Several of the RPD values could not be calculated between the original and duplicate samples as the concentrations in the original sample and its duplicate were not both greater than five times the laboratory detection limit in order to calculate the RPD, or parameters were below the laboratory RDL. The RPD values calculated for this duplicate surface water sample pairing ranged from 0 to 138%. Although aluminum, copper, iron, lead and zinc, exceeded the acceptable limit of 50%, the calculated RPDs for this surface water sample pairing do not suggest inconsistencies in the field collection, the laboratory analysis methods, or the sample homogeneity. Surface Water Trib and Field Blanks The concentrations of BTEX, PHCs F1 to F4, PAHs, OCPs, metals and general inorganics parameters were less than the laboratory detection limits in the trip blank and field blank samples. Therefore, the results are considered reliable. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 3.9 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Limitations September 11, 2015 This report documents work that was performed in accordance with generally accepted professional standards at the time and location in which the services were provided. No other representations, warranties or guarantees are made concerning the accuracy or completeness of the data or conclusions contained within this report, including no assurance that this work has uncovered all potential liabilities associated with the identified property. This report provides an evaluation of selected environmental conditions associated with the identified portion of the property that was assessed at the time the work was conducted and is based on information obtained by and/or provided to Stantec at that time. There are no assurances regarding the accuracy and completeness of this information. All information received from the client or third parties in the preparation of this report has been assumed by Stantec to be correct. Stantec assumes no responsibility for any deficiency or inaccuracy in information received from others. The opinions in this report can only be relied upon as they relate to the condition of the portion of the identified property that was assessed at the time the work was conducted. Activities at the property subsequent to Stantec's assessment may have significantly altered the property's condition. Stantec cannot comment on other areas of the property that were not assessed. Conclusions made within this report consist of Stantec's professional opinion as of the time of the writing of this report, and are based solely on the scope of work described in the report, the limited data available and the results of the work. They are not a certification of the property's environmental condition. This report should not be construed as legal advice. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the client identified herein and any use by any third party is prohibited. Stantec assumes no responsibility for losses, damages, liabilities or claims, howsoever arising, from third party use of this report. This report is limited by the following: 1. Conditions observed on-site at the time of the 2015 field work. 2. Regulatory criteria in effect at the time the assessment was completed. The locations of any utilities, buildings and structures, and property boundaries illustrated in or described within this report, if any, including pole lines, conduits, water mains, sewers and other surface or sub -surface utilities and structures are not guaranteed. Before starting work, the exact location of all such utilities and structures should be confirmed and Stantec assumes no liability for damage to them. The conclusions are based on the site conditions encountered by Stantec at the time the work was performed at the specific testing and/or sampling locations, and conditions may vary among sampling locations. Factors such as areas of potential concern identified in previous Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 4.1 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Signatures September 11, 2015 studies, site conditions (e.g., utilities) and cost may have constrained the sampling locations used in this assessment. In addition, analysis has been carried out for only a limited number of chemical parameters, and it should not be inferred that other chemical species are not present. Due to the nature of the investigation and the limited data available, Stantec does not warrant against undiscovered environmental liabilities nor that the sampling results are indicative of the condition of the entire site. As the purpose of this report is to identify site conditions which may pose an environmental risk; the identification of non -environmental risks to structures or people on the site is beyond the scope of this assessment. Should additional information become available which differs significantly from our understanding of conditions presented in this report, Stantec specifically disclaims any responsibility to update the conclusions in this report. 5.0 SIGNATURES This document entitled Limited Supplemental Phase II Environmental Site Assessment - Aquatic Lot, was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. ("Stantec") for the account of Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (the "Client"). This document was prepared by Alicja Wierzbicka, M.Env.Sc., and reviewed by Jane Yaraskavitch, M.Eng., P.Eng. Prepared by V (signature) Alicja Wierzbicka, M.Env.Sc. Reviewed by J�4,_L _�' L� r v;�V_ (signature) Jane Yaraskavitch, M.Eng., P.Eng. This Phase II ESA was conducted in general accordance with the requirements of the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (A National Standard of Canada (reaffirmed 2013)), CAN/CSA-Z769-00, March 2000. Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx 5.2 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Appendix A Figures September 11, 2015 Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phose_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn l.docx A.1 51buuu szuuuu Brampton- Lake Ontario Ca/ton/7e Mississauga,,AN\\'`;;---_ r� Lake Huron 10 London KEY P " Lake Erie I Vienna 111 Port Stanley Street oa}� 1:3,000,000 Fulton Lr`< .q U - -SOott e i 0 m _ 3i a II I 0] II Port Burwell 05 i .-Provincial Park } -��• = Pon Burwell Z/2— l[/ Street _./,. r lake S/,Qre Lake Erie 0 500 1,000 I m 1:50,000 515066 526000 March 2015 Proiect # 122511076 Legend Client/Project Q Project Area Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sta ntec Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA Small Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Notes Figure No. 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources© Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013. Title Key Plan Legend SBuilding ta ntec Road Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2008. 3. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013. 4. Property Boundary: Kim Husted Surveying Ltd. (1998). Plan 11 R-6760, Project 97-45621, Reference HF 1, February 17, 1998. Tillsonburg, ON. March 2015 Project No_ 122511076 Client/Project Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA Small Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Figure No. 2 Title Site Plan (3 Stantec Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2008. 3. Property Boundary: Kim Husted Surveying Ltd. (1998). Plan 11 R-6760, Project 97-45621, Reference HF 1, February 17, 1998. Tillsonburg, ON Legend Sampling Location A Sediment Sample, Stantec Q Sediment Sample, Stantec (Background) A Deep Core Sample A Sediment Sample, Terropex ® Surface Water Sample, Stantec Surface Water Sample, Stantec (Background) OProperty Boundary August 2015 Protect No. 122511075 Client/Project Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA Small Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Figure No. 3 Title Sampling Locations �r �zanzec Notes 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 UTM Zone 17N 2. Orthoimagery © First Base Solutions, 2008. 3. Base features produced under license with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2013. 4. Property Boundary: Kim Husted Surveying Ltd. (1998). Plan 11 R-6760, Project 97-45621, Reference HF 1, February 17, 1998. Tillsonburg, ON. March 2015 Proiect N o. 12251 1076 Legend Client/Project = Building Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Road Fish Sampling Area Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA Small Crafts Harbour, Port Burwell, ON Figure No. 4 Title Fish Sampling Locations LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Appendix B Field Methodology September 11, 2015 Appendix B FIELD METHODOLOGY ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phose_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn l.docx B. 1 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT — AQUATIC LOT Appendix B Field Methodology September 11, 2015 FIELD METHODOLOGY 1.0 PRE -DRILLING SITE INVESTIGATIONS 1.1 Service and Utility Locates The locations of services and utilities were established prior to the drilling and sampling phase of the investigation. The sampling locations were cleared of underground utilities by a private utility locator. 2.0 SEDIMENT SAMPLING 2.1 Coring Three sediment cores were advances to a maximum depth of 7.62 metres below the water surface using a Pionjar 120 Drilling System with a standard 2" diameter, 30" long split spoon sampler by Strata Drilling Group (Strata). Sediment samples were collected continuously from each location with the use of a split spoon sampler. Stantec personnel logged the characteristics of the materials. 2.2 Sediment Core Logging Materials retrieved from the drilling operation were logged by Stantec personnel. The texture and composition of materials and any indications of contamination were recorded. 2.3 Sediment Sampling Sediment samples were collected continuously from the split spoon samplers. Sediment was placed in laboratory supplied containers for potential laboratory analyses. 3.0 SEDIMENT SAMPLE SURVEY 3.1 Horizontal and Vertical Survey The locations and elevations of the paired sediment, surface water, and benthic invertabrate sampling locations were measured with Trimble Geo XH 6000 -series global positioning system (GPS). The GPS has a 10 cm horizontal accuracy. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx B.2 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT — AQUATIC LOT Appendix B Field Methodology September 11, 2015 4.0 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING Prior to sampling, the surface water dissolved oxygen (DO), water temperature, pH, and conductivity were measured using a hand held multi meter (YSI water quality meter). The appropriate laboratory sample jars were filled by slowly submerging them into the surface water body (Big Otter Creek, Lake Erie). 5.0 BENTHIC INVERTEBRATE COLLECTION Benthic invertebrate samples were collected using a Petite PonarTm grab sampler (area = 0.0232 M2). Three composite grabs were collected at each sediment sampling location (hereafter "Station") for a total area sampled of 0.0696 m2 per Station. Each Ponar grab was sieved in the field using a sieve pail fitted with a 500 mm mesh screen. The three grabs from each Station were preserved in 10% buffered formalin prior to submission to the laboratory for sorting and identification. In addition to standard external jar labels, samples were labeled internally using waterproof paper. The labels for each sample included project number, location, date, Station name and number of jars. A written description of each Station was also completed, which included information such as station depth, presence of macrophytes, presence of algae, sediment odour, etc. 6.0 FISH COLLECTION Fish collection occurred at three areas: one transect in Otter Creek at the Site, and two reference locations to the east and west of the Site (see Figure 4, Appendix A). Collection techniques were selected that were most suited to the habitat, which for this Site were backpack electrofishing from a boat and gill nets. Details of effort are summarized in Table B-1 and Table B-2. All fish collected were identified to species and enumerated. Length and weight for each individual fish were recorded, except for instances where large numbers of one species was encountered at a collection site. In this case, a random subsample of individuals were weighed and measured. Muscle tissue samples were collected from game fish that were captured during the field program and submitted for laboratory analysis. Samples were boneless, skinless fillets taken from the large body fish. Lipid content was also measured as a supporting variable. For small body fish samples, composite samples of one species were submitted for laboratory analysis. Fish tissue was analyzed by Maxxam Analytics in Mississauga, Ontario. ® Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx B.3 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Appendix B Field Methodology September 11, 2015 Table B-1 Summary of Backpack Electrofishing Effort Sampling Area Station Name Length of Stream Date Current Frequency Effort Surveyed (m) Sampled (amps) (Hz) (seconds) RefI-GN-001 • • - - • • 111 1 1 � ��® 1.17 Ref I -GN -002 1 small, 1 large 2015-05-20 12:00 2015-05-21 10:50 22.83 Reference Fishing Area #3 Ref2-GN-001 1 small, 1 large Exposure Area 2015-05-20 13:20 1.00 Ref2-GN-002 1 small, 1 large Table B-2 Summary of Gill Netting Effort Reference Sites Reference Fishing Area #2 RefI-GN-001 1 small, 1 large 2015-05-20 11:40 2015-05-20 12:50 1.17 Ref I -GN -002 1 small, 1 large 2015-05-20 12:00 2015-05-21 10:50 22.83 Reference Fishing Area #3 Ref2-GN-001 1 small, 1 large 2015-05-20 12:20 2015-05-20 13:20 1.00 Ref2-GN-002 1 small, 1 large 2015-05-20 12:35 2015-05-20 13:30 0.92 7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL All samples were collected following strict Stantec sampling procedures. Samples were uniquely labeled and control was maintained through use of chain of custody forms. All samples were collected in laboratory supplied containers and preserved in insulated coolers. Appropriate sampling QA/QC procedures were adhered to at all times. Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn I.docx B.4 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Appendix C Summary Analytical Tables September 11, 2015 Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phose_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn l.docx C.1 Table C-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sample Depth Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type General Chemistry Units I CCME SD15-01 10 -Mar -15 SD15-01 COMP SD15-02 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 STANTEC SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 ZW4602 ZW4603 11 -Mar -15 Field Duplicate 1,2/SD15-01 SS2 3,4/SD15-01 SS4 5,6/SD15-01 SS6 0-0.1m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX B545246 B548083 B548083 B548083 ZW4605 ZX7701/ZX7617 ZX7702/ZX7618 ZX7703/ZX7619 SD15-02 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX B545246 B545246 ZW4602 ZW4603 11 -Mar -15 Field Duplicate SD15-02 COMP SD15-03 SD15-03 COMP SD15-04 SD15-05 SD15-06 SD15-07 SD15-08 SD15-09 SD15-10 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 SDI 5-03 COMP <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.1 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP 0.03 SD15-03 COMP SD15-03 COMP lag/g n/a - - - - - - - - - - - - SD15-03 1,2,3/SS SD15-04 SD15-05 SD15-06 SD15-07 SD15-08 SD15-09 SD15-10 1,2/SD15-02 SS2 3,4/SD15-02 SS4 5,6/SD15-02 SS6 31 D15-03 4,5 6,7/SD15-03 SS7 17 17 20 16 27 20 24 19 11 23 22 21 26 36 22 25 Nitrate (as N) lag/g n/v - - - - - - 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX B548083 B548083 B548083 B545246 B548083 B548083 B548083 B545059 B545246 B545246 B545246 B545246 B545059 B547816 ZX7698/ZX7614 ZX7699/ZX7615 ZX7700/ZX7616 ZW4601 ZX7695/ZX7612 ZX7696 ZX7697/ZX7613 ZW4017 ZW4608 ZW4607 ZW4604 ZW4606 ZW4018 ZX6291 Ammonia (as N) lag/g n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Chloride lag/g n/v <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.1 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 Fluoride lag/g n/a - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Moisture Content % n/v 31 19 19 15 17 17 20 16 27 20 24 19 11 23 22 21 26 36 22 25 Nitrate (as N) lag/g n/v - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) lag/g n/v <0.04 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Nitrite (as N) lag/g n/v <10 - <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 pH S.U. n/v <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 - - <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 - Sulfate lag/g n/v - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen lag/g n/v 391 82 157 72 103 184 85 267 776 66 510 136 85 218 448 200 502 961 409 310 Total Organic Carbon mg/kg n/v 12000 - - - 2200 3800 - - - 2000 - - - 4700 4700 4300 10000 14000 13000 4000 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene lag/g n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Toluene lag/g n/v <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.1 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 Ethylbenzene lag/g n/v <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Xylene, m & p- lag/g n/v <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Xylene, o- lag/g n/v <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Xylenes, Total lag/g n/v <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) lag/g n/v <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX lag/g n/v <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 - <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) lag/g n/v <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) lag/g n/v <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <10 <10 11 <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <50 <50 54 51 <10 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) lag/g n/v <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <10 <10 <10 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <10 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 none n/v YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Metals Aluminum lag/g n/v 7800 1800 2000 3400 2000 2900 1700 2000 7600 1400 2500 1700 2100 1800 3400 3300 6900 9600 4300 2700 Antimony lag/g n/v <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.21 <0.20 Arsenic lag/g 5.9" 2.4 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 3.0 <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.2 1.2 2.2 3.4 1.9 1.4 Barium lag/g n/v 45 8.9 10 20 11 16 7.8 9.6 45 6.9 13 8.0 9.4 9.5 19 19 40 57 28 16 Beryllium lag/g n/v 0.38 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.37 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.32 0.45 <0.20 <0.20 Bismuth lag/g n/v <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Boron lag/g n/v 6.4 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 6.7 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 7.3 7.3 <5.0 <5.0 Boron (Available) lag/g n/v 0.27 <0.050 0.090 0.22 0.082 0.12 0.071 0.089 0.39 <0.050 0.12 0.071 0.095 0.18 0.27 0.17 0.24 0.33 0.31 0.16 Cadmium lag/g 0.6^ 0.14 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 0.18 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 0.13 0.16 <0.10 <O.10 Calcium lag/g n/v 67000 50000 53000 53000 52000 60000 49000 52000 90000 49000 64000 55000 65000 51000 58000 58000 66000 69000 60000 59000 Chromium (Hexavalent) lag/g n/v <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 Chromium (Total) lag/g 37.3^ 12 4.1 4.8 6.6 4.3 6.1 5.9 5.3 12 2.6 5.5 4.4 5.4 3.6 6.4 6.7 12 15 7.5 5.0 Cobalt lag/g n/v 5.7 1.6 1.5 2.4 1.8 2.5 1.5 1.8 5.8 1.4 2.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 2.7 2.6 5 6.8 3.3 2.5 Copper lag/g 35.7^ 14 2.0 2.4 5.1 3.2 5.4 1.9 2.8 16 2.2 4.4 2.8 4.7 2.9 6.1 6.1 13 18 8.4 5.5 Iron lag/g n/v 15000 5300 5300 7300 5600 7000 7700 6300 16000 3500 6600 5200 5700 4100 7800 8200 14000 18000 9400 6200 Lead lag/g 35^ 8.8 2.4 2.6 4.7 2.7 3.8 2.4 2.6 11 2.6 3.7 2.8 3.2 2.3 4 4 7.8 11 7.2 4.4 Lithium lag/g n/v 12 2.5 2.7 4.6 3.5 5 2.2 2.7 12 2.9 3.9 2.7 3.4 3 4.7 5.1 10 14 7 3.8 Magnesium lag/g n/v 14000 9000 9000 9800 9500 11000 9000 9300 19000 6300 12000 8200 12000 8700 10000 12000 14000 15000 12000 9800 Manganese lag/g n/v 520 160 170 240 190 250 150 180 580 140 240 160 230 150 270 270 470 630 310 240 Mercury lag/g 0.17" <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Molybdenum lag/g n/v <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Nickel lag/g n/v 12 2.6 2.6 4.5 3.5 4.8 2.4 3.1 12 3.1 4.4 3.2 3.7 2.6 5.2 4.9 10 15 6.5 5.1 Phosphorus lag/g n/v 780 450 440 530 430 520 640 510 790 240 590 400 480 400 600 680 750 830 660 450 Potassium lag/g n/v 1100 280 320 480 290 430 240 310 1100 230 390 290 370 250 460 510 1000 1400 580 420 Selenium lag/g n/v <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Silver lag/g n/v <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Sodium lag/g n/v 160 58 66 71 81 100 64 68 140 70 90 64 83 86 99 120 150 160 110 80 Strontium lag/g n/v 92 59 65 65 64 76 57 65 120 64 78 69 80 61 72 72 89 98 76 76 Sulfur lag/g n/v 560 100 120 270 170 <50 100 180 1000 200 250 200 360 120 <500 220 490 690 400 280 Thallium lag/g n/v 0.075 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.10 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.067 0.11 <0.050 <0.050 Tin lag/g n/v <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Titanium lag/g n/v 220 - - - 160 170 - - - 94 - - - 150 180 190 210 230 170 140 Tungsten lag/g n/v - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Uranium lag/g n/v 0.41 0.23 0.24 0.27 0.22 0.27 0.32 0.27 0.49 0.16 0.34 0.25 0.27 0.2 0.29 0.28 0.37 0.44 0.36 0.26 Vanadium lag/g n/v 19 9.1 9.1 11 9.5 11 16 11 20 5.2 11 8.6 8.2 6.7 11 13 19 23 13 8.4 Zinc lag/g 123" 48 14 16 23 15 23 13 15 48 13 20 13 15 14 24 29 44 62 30 23 Zirconium lag/g n/v - - - See notes on last page Sta ntec 122511075 Page Iof5 a e Table C-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sample Depth Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Units I CCME SD15-01 10 -Mar -15 SD15-01 COMP SD15-02 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 STANTEC SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 ZW4602 ZW4603 11 -Mar -15 Field Duplicate 1,2/SD15-01 SS2 3,4/SD15-01 SS4 5,6/SD15-01 SS6 0-0.1m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX B545246 B548083 B548083 B548083 ZW4605 ZX7701/ZX7617 ZX7702/ZX7618 ZX7703/ZX7619 SD15-02 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX B545246 B545246 ZW4602 ZW4603 11 -Mar -15 Field Duplicate SD15-02 COMP SD15-03 SDI 5-03 COMP SD15-04 SD15-05 SD15-06 SD15-07 SD15-08 SD15-09 SD15-10 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 <0.0050 <0.0050 SD15-03 COMP ug/g 0.00587" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP SD15-02 COMP <0.0050 SD15-03 COMP SD15-03 COMP <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 SD15-03 1,2,3/S D15-03 SD15-04 SD15-05 SD15-06 SD15-07 SD15-08 SD15-09 SD15-10 1,2/SD15-02 SS2 3,4/SD15-02 SS4 5,6/SD15-02 SS6 <0.0050 4,5 6,7/SD15-03 SS7 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0092 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)anthracene Pg/g 0.0317" 0.01 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-1.52m 1.52-3.05m 3.05-4.57m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX B548083 B548083 B548083 B545246 B548083 B548083 B548083 B545059 B545246 B545246 B545246 B545246 B545059 B547816 ZX7698/ZX7614 ZX7699/ZX7615 ZX7700/ZX7616 ZW4601 ZX7695/ZX7612 ZX7696 ZX7697/ZX7613 ZW4017 ZW4608 ZW4607 ZW4604 ZW4606 ZW4018 ZX6291 Acenaphthene Pg/g 0.00671" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Acenaphthylene ug/g 0.00587" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0083A <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Anthracene Pg/g 0.0469" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0068 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0092 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)anthracene Pg/g 0.0317" 0.01 <0.0050 0.0065 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.017 <0.0050 0.0065 0, <0.0050 0.012 0.0062 <0.0050 0.014 0.006 <0.0050 0.0075 0.014 <0.0050 0.0078 Benzo(a)pyrene Ng/g 0.0319" 0.012 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.015 <0.0050 0.0055 0.042A <0.0050 0.012 0.0057 <0.0050 0.012 0.0054 <0.0050 0.0081 0.016 0.0052 0.0067 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g n/v 0.021 <0.0050 0.0092 0.0068 <0.0050 0.02 <0.0050 0.0082 0.067 <0.0050 0.019 0.010 0.0060 0.014 0.009 0.0059 0.015 0.027 0.0081 0.011 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g n/v 0.0096 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0085 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.033 <0.0050 0.0079 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0081 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0075 0.014 <0.0050 0.0050 Benzo(k)fluoranthene Pg/g n/v 0,0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0074 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.023 <0.0050 0.0057 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0058 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Chrysene Pg/g 0.0571" 0.011 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.016 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.041 <0.0050 0.012 0.0077 <0.0050 0.013 0.0054 <0.0050 0.0081 0.014 0.0058 0.0084 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Ng/g 0.00622" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.111" 0.029 <0.0050 0.016 0.011 0.0062 0.055 <0.0050 0.015 0.095 <0.0050 0.032 0.020 0.012 0.04 0.014 0.0081 0.019 0.033 0.013 0.022 Fluorene ug/g 0.0212" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Ng/g n/v 0.009 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0091 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.037 <0.0050 0.0091 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0081 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0069 0.013 0.0058 0.0050 Methylnaphthalene (Total) Ng/g n/v - <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 - - <0.0071 <0.0071 0.016 - <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 - <0.0071 - - - - <0.0071 Methylnaphthalene, 1- Ng/g n/v <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0059 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Methylnaphthalene, 2- Ng/g 0.0202" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0066 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Naphthalene Pg/g 0.0346" <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 Phenanthrene Ng/g 0.0419" 0.011 <0.0050 0.0082 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.026 <0.0050 0.0055 0.048A <0.0050 0.019 0.011 0.0080 0.033 0.006 <0.0050 0.0075 0.012 0.0052 0.016 Pyrene Ng/g 0.053" 0.022 <0.0050 0.013 0.0084 0.005 0.041 <0.0050 0.011 0.076A <0.0050 0.025 0.017 0.010 0.031 0.011 0.0065 0.015 0.028 0.01 0.018 Total PAH Ng/g n/v <0.0020 - <0.0020 - I - <0.0020 - I - - - - I - I - - I - - I - - <0.0020 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 Ng/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1221 Ng/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 Aroclor 1232 Ng/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1242 ug/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1248 Ng/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1254 ug/g 0.06A <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1260 Ng/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1262 Ng/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1268 ug/g n/v <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Ng/g 0.0341A <0.023 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.020 <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.023 <0.020 <0.015 Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin Aldrin + Dieldrin BHC, alpha- BHC, beta- BHC, delta- Chlordane (Total) Chlordane, alpha- Chlordane, gamma- DDD, o,p'- DDD (p,p'-DDD) DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- DDE, o,p'- DDE (p,p'-DDE) Ng/g Ng/g Pg/g ug/g Ng/g Ng/g ug/g Ng/g Ng/g Pg/g ug/g Ng/g Ng/g n/v n/v n/v n/v n/v 0.0045" n/v n/v n/v 0.00354'4 n/v n/v 0.00142" <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0049 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.015A <0.0020 <0.0020I 0.020 <0.0020 <0.0020 I <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0028 0.013A <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0053A =0.0040A 0.0027A <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0033AMM <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0037A <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0092A <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0058A <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026A 0.0065A 0.0022 7 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- Ng/g n/v 0.0065 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0028 0.013 <0.0020 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 0.0033 0.0029 0.0022 0.0037 0.0092 0.0058 0.0026 DDT, o,p'- ug/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 I <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT (p,p'-DDT) Ng/g 0.00119" <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026A <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0044A <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0044 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT + Metabolites Ng/g n/v 0.0065 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0028 0.035 <0.0020 0.0053 0.0064 0.0027 0.0033 0.0029 0.0022 0.0037 0.014 0.0058 0.0026 DDT Total Ng/g 0.00 1 19A - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dieldrin Pg/g 0.00285" <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan Pg/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan I Pg/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan II Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan Sulfate ug/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin ug/g 0.00267" <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Aldehyde Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Ketone Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor Pg/g 0.0006" <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor Epoxide ug/g 0.0006^ <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide Ng/g 0.0006" <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Hexachlorobenzene Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) Ng/g n/v <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Ng/g n/v <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 Hexachloroethane Pg/g n/v <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) ug/g 0.00094" <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) Ng/g n/v <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0075 <0.0050 <0.0050 Mirex Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Octachlorostyrene Ng/g n/v <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0030 <0.0020 <0.0020 Toxaphene (Comphechlor) Ng/g 0.0001" <0.12 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.72 <0.080 <0.080 see notes on iasT page ® Stantec 122511075 Page 2 of 5 Table C-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sample Depth Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type General Chemistry Units I SD15-11* SD15-12* SD15-13* SD15-14* SD15-15* 12 -Mar -15 13 -Mar -15 13 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 SD15-11 SD15-12 SD15-13 SD15-14 QCSD15-01 SD15-15 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX B545059 B547816 B547816 8547816 B547816 B547816 ZW4019 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6292 ZX6293 ZX6294 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Nitrite (as N) Field Duplicate <10 Ammonia (as N) Pg/g - <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Chloride Ng/g - <0.02 <0.02 - <0.02 Fluoride Pg/g - - - - - Moisture Content % 16 17 20 20 18 17 Nitrate (as N) Pg/g - - - - - - Nitrate + Nitrite (as N) Pg/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Nitrite (as N) Ng/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 pH S. U. <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Sulfate ug/g - - - - - - Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Pg/g 136 51 60 77 65 74 Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 5500 3900 4100 2900 3400 2500 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Toluene Ng/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Ethylbenzene Pg/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Xylene, m & p- Pg/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 Xylene, o- Ng/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Xylenes, Total Pg/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) Ng/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX Pg/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) Pg/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) Ng/g <50 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) Pg/g <50 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 none YES YES YES YES YES YES Metals Aluminum Pg/g 1600 1600 1700 1600 1600 2000 Antimony Pg/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Arsenic Ng/g <1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 Barium Pg/g 8.5 8.1 8.4 8.2 7.7 10 Beryllium Ng/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Bismuth Pg/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Boron Pg/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Boron (Available) Ng/g 0.065 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Cadmium Pg/g <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 <O.10 <0.10 <O.10 Calcium Ng/g 48000 75000 71000 57000 57000 70000 Chromium (Hexavalent) Pg/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 Chromium (Total) Pg/g 4 17 6.5 3.5 5.0 4.4 Cobalt Ng/g 1.4 2.7 1.8 1.5 1.6 2.0 Copper Pg/g 2.5 2.2 3.8 2.4 2.9 4.8 Iron Ng/g 4700 27000 8900 4400 6400 5800 Lead Pg/g 2.3 4.0 3.2 3.0 2.9 3.5 Lithium Pg/g 2.9 1.2 1.9 2.3 2.1 3.1 Magnesium Ng/g 8100 12000 11000 7900 7700 12000 Manganese Pg/g 160 210 180 160 160 230 Mercury Ng/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Molybdenum Pg/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Nickel Pg/g 2.8 4.2 3.4 3.3 3.3 4.0 Phosphorus Ng/g 430 1500 750 360 400 480 Potassium Pg/g 240 210 270 280 240 340 Selenium Ng/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Silver Pg/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Sodium Pg/g 75 69 69 <50 <50 70 Strontium Pg/g 58 92 86 74 72 89 Sulfur Pg/g 97 280 310 220 210 370 Thallium Ng/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Tin Pg/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Titanium Pg/g 150 - - 130 160 150 Tungsten Ng/g - - - - - - Uranium Pg/g 0.23 0.58 0.35 0.22 0.23 0.30 Vanadium Ng/g 8.4 63 18 6.4 12 9.2 Zinc Pg/g 13 33 19 15 9.9 17 Zirconium Pg/g - See notes on last page Sta ntec 122511075 Page 3of5 a e Table C-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sample Depth Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Units I SD15-11* SD15-12* SD15-13* SD15-14* SD15-15* 12 -Mar -15 13 -Mar -15 13 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 16 -Mar -15 SD15-11 SD15-12 SD15-13 SD15-14 QCSD15-01 SD15-15 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m 0-0.1 m STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX 8545059 8547816 8547816 8547816 8547816 8547816 ZW4019 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6292 ZX6293 ZX6294 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 Field Duplicate <0.0050 Acenaphthene Pg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Acenaphthylene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Anthracene µg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(a)pyrene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0059 0.0096 <0.0050 Fluorene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene µg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Methylnaphthalene (Total) ug/g - <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 Methylnaphthalene, 1- Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Methylnaphthalene, 2- ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Naphthalene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Phenanthrene µg/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0064 <0.0050 Pyrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0065 0.0096 <0.0050 Total PAH Ng/g - - - <0.0020 - <0.0020 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1221 Ng/g <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1232 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1242 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1248 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1260 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1262 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Aroclor 1268 Ng/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Ng/g <0.020 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 Organochlorine Pesticides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Aldrin + Dieldrin Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, alpha- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, beta- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 BHC, delta- ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane, alpha- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Chlordane, gamma- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD, o,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD (p,p'-DDD) Pg/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE, o,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE (p,p'-DDE) Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT (p,p'-DDT) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT + Metabolites Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 DDT Total Ng/g - - - - - - Dieldrin Pg/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan I Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan II Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endosulfan Sulfate Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Pg/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Endrin Ketone Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor Epoxide Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Hexachloroethane Ng/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 Mirex Ng/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 Toxaphene (Camphechlor) Pg/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 see notes on iasT page ® Stantec 122511075 Page 4 of 5 Table C-1 Summary of Sediment Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Notes: CCME Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Sediment Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life, Interim Freshwater Sediment Quality Guideline _Concentration exceeds the indicated standard. 15.2 Measured concentration was less than the applicable standard. <0.50 Laboratory reportable detection limit was greater than the applicable standard. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reportable detection limit. n/v No standard/guideline value. - Parameter not analyzed / not available. MI Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Background samples ® Stantec 122511075 Page 5 of 5 Table C-2 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location mg/L n/v SW15-01 SWI 5-02 SW15-03 SW15-04 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW15-07 SW15-08 SW15-09 SW15-10 SWI 5-11* SW15-12* SW15-13* SW15-14* SW15-15* Field Blank Trip Blank Sample Date pH S.U. 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 12 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 Sample ID <0.20 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen SW15-01 OC -SW -15-01 SWI 5-02 SWI 5-03 SWI 5-04 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW75-07 SW15-08 SW15-09 SW15-10 SW15-11 SW15-12 SW15-13 SW15-14 SW15-15 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK Sampling Company 0.13 <0.10 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC Laboratory <0.20 <0.20 MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.40 <0.40 Xylenes, Total lag/L n/v <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 6526959/ B526959/ B526959/ B526959/ 8526959/ <0.40 <0.40 0.24 <0.40 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545209/ 6545209/ 6545209/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545209/ 6545209/ <25 <25 <25 6545209/ 6545209/ Laboratory Work Order <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX lag/L n/v <25 B59b463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ 8596463/ <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 6521988 6521988 6521988 6521988 6521998 6521998 6521998 6521988 6521988 6521998 8521998 <100 <100 <100 8521998 6521998 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) lag/L B543306 B543306 B543306 B543306 8543306 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) AW2719/ AW2720/ AW2721/ AW2722/ AW2723/ <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 ZW4617/ ZW4615/ ZW4614/ ZW4613/ ZW4483/ ZW4482/ ZW4481/ ZW4616/ ZW4618/ ZW4485/ ZW4484/ lag/L n/v YES ZW4486/ ZW4487/ Laboratory Sample ID YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES AHZ739/ AHZ740/ AHZ741/ AHZ742/ AHZ743/ 1.23 2.09 1.30 1.77 1.62 LX0924 LX0922 LX0921 LX0920 LX0946 LX0945 LX0944 LX0923 LX0925 LX0948 LX0947 <0.50 Iron lag/L LX0949 LX0950 6946 3046 3256 6636 3036 298 3086 323 762 668 637 304 378 968 MH7156 MH7157 MH7158 MH7159 MH7160 lag/L 5.946 Sample Type Units CCME Field Duplicate 0.50 0.31 0.26 <0.20 0.27 0.57 0.56 0.49 0.24 0.34 0.80 0.67 <0.20 <0.20 Field Blank Trip Blank uenerai unemistry Hardness (as CaCO3) mg/L n/v <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 240 120 120 170 160 <0.20 <0.20 pH S.U. n/v <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 8.24 8.08 8.09 8.15 8.22 <0.20 <0.20 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L n/v 0.34 0.58 0.37 0.43 0.62 0.5 0.54 0.43 0.35 0.58 0.5 0.65 <0.50 <0.50 1.4 0.37 0.13 <0.10 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene lag/L 3708 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Toluene lag/L 2B <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.53 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.35 0.23 <0.20 <0.20 Ethylbenzene lag/L 908 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Xylene, m & p- lag/L n/v <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.24 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 Xylene, o- lag/L n/v <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.20 <0.40 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.40 <0.40 Xylenes, Total lag/L n/v <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.24 <0.40 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.40 <0.40 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) pg/L n/v <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 PHC Fl (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX lag/L n/v <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) lag/L n/v <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) lag/L n/v <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) lag/L n/v <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 <200 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 lag/L n/v YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Metals Aluminum lag/L 5/100v,,,B 1738 4738 1496 1398 3986 1576 1298 1438 1528 5708 7108 4118 2968 4158 7928 7038 <3.0 <3.0 Antimony lag/L n/v <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Arsenic lag/L 5B 0.42 0.49 0.38 0.43 0.51 0.47 0.41 0.38 0.39 0.53 0.80 0.51 0.62 0.67 0.90 0.69 <0.10 <0.10 Barium lag/L n/v 43.4 49.6 44.0 42.6 48.7 44.4 46.0 45.2 47.5 49.3 45.3 44.2 26.2 27.5 37.0 33.5 <1.0 <1.0 Beryllium lag/L n/v <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <O.10 <O.10 <O.10 <O.10 <O.10 <O.10 <O.10 <O.10 Bismuth lag/L n/v <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Boron pg/L 29000A15006 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 <50 Cadmium lag/L 3.58 <0.010 0.015 <0.010 0.012 0.016 0.011 0.010 <0.010 0.012 0.011 0.010 0.014 0.012 0.011 0.027 0.012 <0.010 <0.010 Calcium mg/L n/v 86.8 86.8 90.5 87.3 88.0 90.9 89.2 90.0 89.4 88.1 75.0 84.4 35.9 36.0 50.1 44.6 <0.050 <0.050 Chromium (Hexavalent) lag/L 18 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Chromium (Total) lag/L n/v <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Cobalt lag/L n/v <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Copper lag/L 3.68 1.23 2.09 1.30 1.77 1.62 0.99 1.34 1.12 1.47 1.66 1.85 2.06 2.07 1.63 2.48 2.44 <0.50 <0.50 Iron lag/L 3008 3606 6946 3046 3256 6636 3036 298 3086 323 762 668 637 304 378 968 863 <10 <10 Lead lag/L 5.946 0.25 0.57 <0.20 0.24 0.50 0.31 0.26 <0.20 0.27 0.57 0.56 0.49 0.24 0.34 0.80 0.67 <0.20 <0.20 Lithium lag/L n/v <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Magnesium mg/L n/v 16.4 16.9 16.4 16.9 16.3 18.0 17.3 16.8 17.4 16.6 14.5 16.0 8.79 9.23 11.1 9.63 <0.050 <0.050 Manganese lag/L n/v 44.2 64.3 43.2 47.4 61.6 45.1 45.3 43.9 44.3 62.4 72.4 58.5 9.8 9.9 70.4 46.8 <1.0 <1.0 Mercury ug/L 736 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 I <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 I <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Molybdenum lag/L 0.0266 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1,16 1,16 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Nickel lag/L 138.756 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.3 1.4 1.6 <1.0 1.2 1.6 1.5 <1.0 <1.0 Phosphorus lag/L n/v 35 46 25 48 44 21 20 25 24 45 - 40 - - - - <10 <10 Potassium mg/L n/v 2.39 2.72 2.49 2.35 2.54 2.57 2.44 2.50 2.45 2.77 2.37 2.53 1.58 1.77 2.03 1.77 <0.050 <0.050 Selenium lag/L 1 B 0.16 0.15 <0.10 0.22 0.15 0.21 0.16 0.20 0.18 0.18 0.15 <O.10 0.16 0.17 0.21 0.16 <O.10 <O.10 Silicon lag/L n/v 4390 4860 4670 4560 4950 4870 4520 4800 4560 5140 3400 4850 838 1110 1860 1660 <100 <100 Silver lag/L 0.111 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 0.031 <0.020 Sodium mg/L n/v 40.3 57.8 25.8 24.9 58.7 43.2 47.8 28.6 51.6 39.9 14.6 37.4 9.06 9.44 11.2 9.42 <0.050 <0.050 Strontium lag/L n/v 309 314 319 307 324 329 320 313 322 304 280 298 166 171 212 187 <1.0 <1.0 Sulfur mg/L n/v 11.4 12.6 9.2 11.5 9.0 9.7 14.6 11.5 14.3 11.2 10.4 11.6 8.5 4.6 7.8 8.5 <3.0 <3.0 Thallium lag/L 0.86 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 Tin lag/L n/v <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Titanium lag/L n/v 22.5 23.3 <5.0 5.2 11.3 5.6 <5.0 6.1 5.7 42.7 26.2 15.0 7.6 26.2 20.1 17.6 <5.0 <5.0 Uranium lag/L 33A 156 0.76 0.78 0.78 0.80 0.76 0.84 0.79 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.73 0.73 0.40 0.41 0.54 0.48 <O.10 <O.10 Vanadium lag/L n/v <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Zinc lag/L 308 27.9 5.1 <5.0 46,26 <5.0 30.18 <5.0 18.5 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 MF 5.7 1018 5.1 9.3 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 Zirconium lag/L n/v <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.83 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1221 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1232 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1242 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1248 Ng/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1254 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1260 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1262 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Aroclor 1268 lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) lag/L n/v <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 - <0.05 <0.05 See notes on last page ® Stantec 122511075 Page 1 of 3 Table C-2 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Ng/L 5.88 SW15-01 SWI 5-02 SW15-03 SW15-04 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW15-07 SW15-08 SW15-09 SW15-10 SWI 5-11* SW15-12* SW15-13* SW15-14* SW15-15* Field Blank Trip Blank Sample Date Acenaphthylene Ng/L 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 9 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 10 -Mar -15 11 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 12 -Mar -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 21 -May -15 12 -Mar -15 12 -Mar -15 Sample ID <0.010 Anthracene SW15-01 OC -SW -15-01 SWI 5-02 SWI 5-03 SWI 5-04 SW15-05 SW15-06 SW75-07 SW15-08 SW15-09 SW15-10 SW15-11 SW15-12 SW15-13 SW15-14 SW15-15 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK Sampling Company <0.010 <0.010 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC Laboratory <0.010 <0.010 MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo (b/j)fIuoranthene pg/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6526959/ B526959/ B526959/ B526959/ B526959/ <0.010 <0.010 0.02 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545209/ 6545209/ 6545209/ 6545248/ 6545248/ 6545209/ 6545209/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6545209/ 6545209/ Laboratory Work Order <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(k)fluoranthene pg/L n/v <0.010 B59b463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ B596463/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 6521988 6521988 6521988 6521988 6521998 6521998 6521998 6521988 6521988 6521998 8521998 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 8521998 6521998 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Dibenzo (a,h)anthracene pg/L B543306 B543306 B543306 B543306 8543306 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Fluoranthene AW2719/ AW2720/ AW2721/ AW2722/ AW2723/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 ZW4617/ ZW4615/ ZW4614/ ZW4613/ ZW4483/ ZW4482/ ZW4481/ ZW4616/ ZW4618/ ZW4485/ ZW4484/ Ng/L 3B <0.010 ZW4486/ ZW4487/ Laboratory Sample ID <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 AHZ739/ AHZ740/ AHZ741/ AHZ742/ AHZ743/ <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 LX0924 LX0922 LX0921 LX0920 LX0946 LX0945 LX0944 LX0923 LX0925 LX0948 LX0947 <0.010 Methylnaphthalene, 1- Ng/L LX0949 LX0950 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 MH7156 MH7157 MH7158 MH7159 MH7160 pg/L n/v Sample Type Units CCME Field Duplicate <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.011 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Field Blank Trip Blank Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene Ng/L 5.88 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Acenaphthylene Ng/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Anthracene Ng/L 0.0128 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(a)anthracene pg/L 0.0186 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(a)pyrene pg/L 0.0158 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.015 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo (b/j)fIuoranthene pg/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.02 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene pg/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Benzo(k)fluoranthene pg/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Chrysene Ng/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Dibenzo (a,h)anthracene pg/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Fluoranthene ug/L 0.048 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Fluorene Ng/L 3B <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene Ng/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Methylnaphthalene, 1- Ng/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Methylnaphthalene, 2- pg/L n/v <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.011 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Naphthalene pg/L 1.1B <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.015 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Phenanthrene pg/L 0.48 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Pyrene pg/L 0.0258 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 Organocnlonne Pesticides Aldrin pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 BHC, alpha- pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 BHC, beta- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 BHC, delta- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Chlordane (Total) Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Chlordane, alpha- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Chlordane, gamma- pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 DDD, o,p'- pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDD (p,p'-DDD) pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 DDE, o,p'- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.00 1 <0.005 <.001 <0.00 1 <0.00 1 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDE (p,p'-DDE) pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- ug/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 DDT, o,p'- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.00 1 <0.005 <0.001 <0.00 1 <0.00 1 < .001 <0.005 <0.005 DDT (p,p'-DDT) Ng/L 0.0018 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.001 <0.005 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.005 <0.005 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 DDT+ Metabolites ug/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - <0.005 <0.005 Dieldrin pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan pg/L 0.06A 0.0038 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan I Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan II Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endosulfan Sulfate pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endrin Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 Endrin Aldehyde Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Endrin Ketone pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Heptachlor Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Heptachlor Epoxide Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 - <0.005 - - - - <0.005 <0.005 Hexachlorobenzene Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) ug/L 1.38 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.004 <0.009 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 <0.009 <0.009 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L n/v <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.01 <0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.02 <0.02 Hexachloroethane Ng/L n/v <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.003 <0.01 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.01 <0.01 Lindane (Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma) Ng/L n/v <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 Methoxychlor (4,4' -Methoxychlor) Ng/L n/v <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.003 <0.01 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.01 <0.01 Mirex Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Octachlorostyrene Ng/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Oxychlordane pg/L n/v <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.003 <0.005 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.005 <0.005 Toxaphene ug/L n/v <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 - <0.2 - - - <0.2 <0.2 See notes on last page ® Stantec 122511075 Page 2 of 3 Table C-2 Summary of Surface Water Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Notes: CCME Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment A Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life - Freshwater Aquatics Short Term B Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines, Canadian Water Quality Guidelines for the Protection of Aquatic Life - Freshwater Aquatics Long Term -Concentration exceeds the indicated standard. 15.2 Measured concentration was less than the applicable standard. <0.50 Laboratory reportable detection limit was greater than the applicable standard. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reportable detection limit. n/v No standard/guideline value. - Parameter not analyzed / not available. LTG The CWQG for cadmium (i.e. long-term guideline) of 0.09 Ng 1-1 is for waters of 50 mg CaCO3 1-1 hardness. The CWQG for cadmium is related to water hardness (as CaCO3): At hardness >_ 17 to <_ 280 mg/L, the CWQG is calculated using this equation (CWQG (Ng/L) = 1 0{0.83(log [hardness]) - 2.46 }); At hardness > 280 mg/L, the CWQG is 0.37 ug/L. sra The short-term benchmark concentration of 1.0 pg •L-1 is for waters of 50 mg CaCO3 1-1 hardness. The short-term benchmark for cadmium is related to water hardness (as CaCO3): When the water hardness is 0 to < 5.3 mg/L, the short-term benchmark is 0.11 Ng/L, At hardness >- 5.3 to <- 360 mg/L, the short-term benchmark is calculated using this equation (Short-term benchmark (Ng/L) = 10{1.016(log [hardness]) - 1.71 )); At hardness > 360 mg/L, the short-term benchmark is 7.7 Ng/L. Tacl Value is minumum value available. Sample -specific value to be calculated (equation). VARI Variable, 5 pg/L if pH < 6.5 and 100 Ng/L if pH > 6.5 ® Stantec 122511075 Page 3 of 3 Table C-3 Summary of Fish Tissue Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Name Sample Date Sample ID Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Fish Species Fat (gravimetric) Moisture Metals REFI-COMP1* 19 -May -15 REF]-COMP1 STANTEC MAXX AIS104 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS105 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMP3* 19 -May -15 REF] -COMP3 STANTEC MAXX AIS106 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner REF1-COMP4* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP4 STANTEC MAXX AIS107 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMPS* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP5 STANTEC MAXX AIS108 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 REF -I -WB -OI* MAXX 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 Body EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 REF -I -WB -01 79.6 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC <0.3 MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX 0.5 AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 AIS115 AIS116 AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 AIS 114 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Composite Composite Composite Composite Composite <0.05 <0.05 Fillet Filler Fillet Fillet Fillet <0.05 <0.05 Bismuth (Bi) lag/g <0.05 Fillet <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald <0.5 Units White Sucker White Sucker Common Carp Common Carp Common Carp <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 White Bass <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner 0.01 0.04 0.06 1.0 0.40 3.5 9.5 2.4 2.2 2.6 2.8 3.3 2.9 3.3 g/ l OOg 84.2 82.3 76.0 70.3 79.0 80.0 79.9 77.6 77.1 78.1 74.6 REFI-COMP1* 19 -May -15 REF]-COMP1 STANTEC MAXX AIS104 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS105 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMP3* 19 -May -15 REF] -COMP3 STANTEC MAXX AIS106 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner REF1-COMP4* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP4 STANTEC MAXX AIS107 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF1-COMPS* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP5 STANTEC MAXX AIS108 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REF I-COMP6* REF2-YP-0I* REF2-COMP1* 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 1.8 78.8 2.0 80.1 1.6 77.2 1.2 81.3 1.9 77.9 REF I-COMP6* REF2-YP-0I* REF2-COMP1* 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP6 REF2-YP-0I REFIYP-01 REF2-COMP1 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX AIS109 AIS112 AIS113 AIS110 Composite Small <0.1 Composite Small <0.1 Fillet Fillet (Duplicate) Antimony (Sb) Body <0.05 Body Rainbow Smelt Yellow Perch Yellow Perch Spottail Shiner <0.05 2.5 0.10 0.30 1.3 77.2 79.6 79.9 74.5 REF2-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REF2-COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS111 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner 2.3 76.1 Arsenic (As) lag/g <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 Antimony (Sb) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Barium (Ba) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 2.2 1.4 1.4 1.7 1.6 <0.3 0.5 0.5 1.2 0.6 1.1 2.0 <0.3 <0.3 2.6 1.6 Beryllium (Be) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Bismuth (Bi) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Boron (B) lag/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 Cadmium (Cd) lag/g <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.06 <0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.03 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.03 Calcium (Ca) lag/g 400 130 69 78 76 9500 6400 8200 8200 7700 920 5900 4700 4700 4400 6000 12000 380 1000 8500 9300 Chromium (Cr) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 Cobalt (Co) lag/g <0.005 0.009 0.012 0.009 0.011 0.052 0.028 0.032 0.036 0.041 <0.005 0.005 0.007 0.020 0.007 0.014 0.012 <0.005 <0.005 0.037 0.028 Copper (Cu) lag/g <0.5 0.5 1.7 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0 0.6 <0.5 0.6 0.8 <0.5 0.7 0.7 <0.5 0.6 0.8 0.6 Iron (Fe) lag/g 6 9 29 16 19 140 60 76 83 110 5 10 12 25 16 20 15 4 4 100 37 Lead (Pb) lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.07 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.05 <0.03 <0.03 0.11 0.04 Magnesium (Mg) lag/g 230 260 240 250 240 450 350 410 400 420 290 290 280 310 260 340 400 290 300 370 370 Manganese (Mn) lag/g 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 7.8 4.2 5.4 5.6 5.9 0.4 1.9 1.7 2.0 1.5 2.1 2.6 <0.3 0.7 6.7 2.9 Mercury (Hg) lag/g 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.17 0.16 0.022 0.027 0.036 0.035 0.042 0.10 0.049 0.034 0.038 0.055 0.030 0.045 0.040 0.058 0.054 0.030 Molybdenum (Mo) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Nickel (Ni) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.10 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 Phosphorus (P) lag/g 2100 2400 2300 2200 2300 6300 5200 6000 5900 5800 2500 4800 4200 4100 3800 4900 7600 2400 2900 4900 6800 Potassium (K) lag/g 3500 4700 3800 3700 3900 2900 3000 3100 3000 3000 3800 3100 3100 3000 2800 2800 2700 4200 4200 3000 2900 Selenium (Se) lag/g 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.3 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.7 Silver (Ag) lag/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 Sodium (Na) lag/g 570 350 440 330 430 670 640 740 740 750 370 750 710 760 540 520 690 300 320 840 730 Strontium (Sr) lag/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 15 11 13 14 12 1.0 6.4 5.1 6.7 5.1 7.9 14 <0.5 0.6 13 12 Thallium (TI) lag/g <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.024 0.006 0.008 0.004 0.005 0.003 0.004 0.010 0.015 0.003 0.004 Tin (Sn) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 Titanium (Ti) lag/g 1.7 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.8 7.5 4.8 5.9 6.2 6.2 2.1 3.9 3.6 3.8 3.0 4.3 6.3 2.0 2.4 4.9 5.4 Uranium (U) lag/g 0.007 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.007 0.006 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.009 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.007 Vanadium (V) lag/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 Zinc (Zn) lag/g 4 3 16 13 8 59 55 bl 65 67 5 20 26 23 28 23 24 6 7 25 27 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Aroclor 1016 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1221 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1232 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1242 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.1 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1248 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.05 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1254 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.06 0.08 0.05 0.04 <0.03 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.06 <0.03 <0.03 0.08 0.04 Aroclor 1260 lag/g <0.03 0.04 0.31 0.29 0.21 0.04 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.09 0.07 0.08 0.10 <0.03 <0.03 0.11 0.05 Aroclor 1262 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Aroclor 1268 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) lag/g I <0.03 1 0.04 1 0.45 1 0.50 1 0.30 1 0.08 1 0.14 1 0.18 1 0.11 1 0.14 1 0.09 1 0.08 1 <0.05 1 0.16 1 0.13 1 0.12 1 0.2 1 <0.03 1 <0.03 1 0.19 1 0.09 Stantec 122511075 Page 1 of 2 Table C-3 Summary of Fish Tissue Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Name Sample Date Sample ID Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Sample ID Sample Type Fish Species Organochlorine Pesticides Units EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 AIS115 AIS116 AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Composite Composite Composite Composite Composite Fillet Filler Fillet Fillet Fillet <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body Small Body <0.02 <0.02 delta -BHC lag/g <0.02 Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald Emerald White Sucker White Sucker Common Carp Common Carp Common Carp <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner Shiner <0.02 REF -I -WB -OI* 19 -May -15 REF -I -WB -01 STANTEC MAXX AIS 114 Fillet White Bass REFI-COMP1* 19 -May -15 REF]-COMP1 STANTEC MAXX AIS104 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP2* 19 -May -15 REF1-COMP2 STANTEC MAXX AIS105 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP3* 19 -May -15 REF] -COMP3 STANTEC MAXX AIS106 Composite Small Body Spottail Shiner REFI-COMP4* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP4 STANTEC MAXX AIS107 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI -COMPS* 19 -May -15 REFI -COMP5 STANTEC MAXX AIS108 Composite Small Body Rainbow Smelt REFI-COMP6* REF2-YP-0I * REF2-COMP1 * REF2-COMP2* 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 19 -May -15 REFI-COMP6 REF2-YP-0I REFIYP-01 REF2-COMP1 REF2-COMP2 STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC STANTEC MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX MAXX AIS109 AIS112 AIS113 AIS110 AIS111 Composite Small <0.02 Composite Small Composite Small <0.02 Fillet Fillet (Duplicate) <0.02 <0.02 Body <0.02 Body Body Rainbow Smelt Yellow Perch Yellow Perch Spottail Shiner Spottail Shiner Aldrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Aldrin + Dieldrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 alpha -BHC lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 beta -BHC lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 delta -BHC lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Chlordane (Total) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 a -Chlordane lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 g -Chlordane lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDD, o,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDD (p,p'-DDD) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDD, o,p'-+ DDD, p,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDE, o,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDE (p,p'-DDE) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.09 0.06 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 DDE, o,p'-+ DDE, p,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.09 0.06 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 DDT, o,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDT (p,p'-DDT) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 DDT+ Metabolites lag/g <0.02 <0.02 0.12 0.06 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.04 <0.02 0.02 0.04 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 0.03 Dieldrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Endosulfan I (alpha) lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Endosulfan 11 lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Endosulfan sulfate lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 Endosulfan (Total) lag/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 Endrin lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Endrin aldehyde lag/g <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Heptachlor lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Heptachlor epoxide lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Hexachlorobenzene lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Lindane lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Methoxychlor lag/g <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.1 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 Mirex lag/g <0.03 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.05 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Octachlorostyrene lag/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 Toxaphene lag/g I <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <2 <1 (1) 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 1 <0.5 Notes: 15.2 Concentration was detected. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reportable detection limit. - Parameter not analyzed / not available. MI Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. * Background samples Stantec 122511075 Page 2 of 2 Table C-4 Summary of Waste Characterization Analytical Results Limited Supplemental Phase II ESA - Port Burwell Fisheries and Oceans Canada Sample Location Sample Date Sample ID Sampling Company Laboratory Laboratory Work Order Laboratory Sample ID Units O.Reg. 347 Sch 4 1 TCLP 9 -Mar -15 TCLP STANTEC MAXX 8548083 ZX7707 General Chemistry Moisture Content % n/v 18 1 Flashpoint deg C n/v >61 Leachate Preparation Amount Extracted (Wet Weight) g n/v 25 pH Final S.U. n/v 6.11 pH Initial S.U. n/v 9.25 Total Solids % n/v 100 Extraction Fluid none n/v FLUID 1 Metals - TCLP Arsenic mg/L 2.5A <0.20 Barium mg/L 100A <0.20 Boron mg/L 500 OA <0.10 Cadmium mg/L 0.5A <0.050 Chromium (Total) mg/L 5A <0.10 Lead mg/L 5A <0.10 Mercury mg/L 0.1A <0.0010 Selenium mg/L 1 A <0.10 Silver mg/L 5A <0.010 Uranium mg/L, 10A <0.010 BTEX and Petroleum Hydrocarbons Benzene Ng/g n/v <0.005 Toluene iag/g n/v <0.02 Ethylbenzene Ng/g n/v <0.01 Xylene, m & p- iag/g n/v <0.04 Xylene, o- ug/g n/v <0.02 Xylenes, Total Ng/g n/v <0.04 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) iag/g n/v <10 PHC F1 (C6 -C10 range) minus BTEX iag/g n/v <10 PHC F2 (>C10 -C16 range) Ng/g n/v <10 PHC F3 (>C16 -C34 range) Ng/g n/v <10 PHC F4 (>C34-050 range) ug/g n/v <10 Chromatogram to baseline at nC50 none n/v YES Semi -Volatile Organics - TCLP Benzo(a)pyrene Ng/L lA <0.10 Cresol, m & p- (Methylphenol, 3&4-) lag/L n/v <2.5 Cresol, o- (Methylphenol, 2-) iag/L 200000A <2.5 Cresol, Total Leachable Ng/L 200000A <2.5 Dichlorophenol, 2,4- Ng/L 90000A <2.5 Dinitrotoluene, 2,4- lag/L 130A <10 Hexachlorobenzene lag/L 130A <10 Hexachlorobutadiene (Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene) iag/L 500A <10 Hexachloroethane ug/L 3000A <10 Nitrobenzene Ng/L 2000A <10 Pentachlorophenol Ng/L 6000A <2.5 Pyridine Ng/L 5000A <10 Tetrachlorophenol, 2,3,4,6- pg/L 10000A <2.5 Trichlorophenol, 2,4,5- Ng/L 400000A <0.50 Trichlorophenol, 2,4,6- lag/L 500A <2.5 Polychlorinated Biphenyls - TCLP Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) lag/L 300A <3.0 Volatile Organic Compounds - TCLP Benzene mg/L 0.5A <0.020 Carbon Tetrachloride (Tetrachloromethane) mg/L 0.5A <0.020 Chlorobenzene (Monochlorobenzene) mg/L 8A <0.020 Chloroform (Trichloromethane) mg/L 10A <0.020 Dichlorobenzene, 1,2- mg/L 20A <0.050 Dichlorobenzene, 1,4- mg/L 0.5A <0.050 Dichloroethane, 1,2- mg/L 0.5A <0.050 Dichloroethene, 1,1- mg/L 1.4A <0.020 Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) mg/L 200A <1.0 Methylene Chloride (Dichloromethane) mg/L 5A <0.20 Tetrachloroethene (PCE) mg/L 3A <0.020 Trichloroethene (TCE) mg/L 5A <0.020 Vinyl chloride mg/L 0.2A <0.020 Notes: O.Reg. 347 Sch 4 Ontario Ministry of the Environment A MOE O.Reg. 347 of R.R.O. 1990 - Schedule 4 - Leachate Quality Criteria 6.5AAmConcentration exceeds the indicated standard. 15.2 Measured concentration was less than the applicable standard. <0.50 Laboratory reportable detection limit was greater than the applicable standard. <0.03 Analyte was not detected at a concentration greater than the laboratory reportable dete n/v No standard/guideline value. ® Stantec 122511075 Page 1 of 1 LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Appendix D Licence to Collect Fish September 11, 2015 Stantec v:\01225\active\ 12251 1075\reports\ra\final\a pp_i_phose_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aq uaf ic_esa_fn l.docx D.1 Ontario IAMIMIdo BRIAR IRF tuemmon EEN1118 Licence to Collect Fish for Scientific Purposes Permis pour faire is coliecte de poissons I des fins scientifiques TW ftw= Is' arch Pars i Worm Fm rau,y tt subdoe mew ardor slw F m w d w ft wnwtrveowe AM tor► W. t 3mm M. W donalnb 1v79332 Lod Rekronee No. WI1Rloaf 2015 10003038 u piRlss ews d vi an vertu w PtRSi I au ri0lwalwrlt.o< Iw aelwfnee a pwrrl. de Pid% f nmM commRNmwrrc a R Cal Fwr f Pratwetlwn �i p~olpwn faro a 1e9r s! N IMUS of Lad Naas 1 Nan RR m" FUM Nana: P►Anon MEM- NrM! Rd Pdnwn Lrreeaww Nan, do awdere Ms. Meson I Kelly I do pmn Nrns ai BislnaelO,oa�detUadAlelralon, R aonaolmn, RIRR Ra 19RR11RMartln Paein�Itnrlda l alNlanan M a. AehMpM, 5tentec consulano Ltd. McFb y eddam of &mf Hr & M a M DmMWQmL ~PFR PAtRlpab nMMR lfeawe" AdtsaseMMEMNdll ellmswpvrw ru abagmte Offi-9, 5ulte 1 wp � wdraearoPamr / W isromweAwmlapellle Guelph m esolhet the eP s. siFe aro quawas a nen nam uTe wFlsrs m est out bNow. Pour fabs M C0000be 08 esp3ess sulvantes(craw n tlal m IiiMquss el-domm s r. is I 00mrap Cods rmmwp N1u 4135 spade ENO= W and x I Awed@ Fre1M1 x AWN Adult x Nurbae Ndnde Nemo w rrasrmor Nom de rilnam Iwo; Yellow Perch, Whim Sucker or X 5 Big Otter Clltti3Tt: Cenberchid species Yellow Perch, ME BMW or X 10 morn shore of Lake Erie. In the Pont Burwell area Centrarchid SPIM Small-bodldlbrep spIMI X 150 Btg Otter Creek and N shore of Lake Erie, in Port Burrell 7aaa" o Wmmmmm';;Wj:Ibt eOW"/ UM daspuftweWMA dw„ ayome popmcomwftn rr' Tissue ammW as part of a alte-speclk risk atssemnern Tor the Wri—mrbnent of Fii WFC9es and Ocem elddo/e oa5 I Canada(DFO) tretrs McdoWrOmmemode.n sumo e,v.y Dele / Dab dr�,aoa„ aendoowx, (YYYY4A-D®) I M) 2015-05-13 2015-12-31 7Msti aarx. b r,eoea m QR i7�0orn o>m� m ShcedWa A R lnduded. � G parts dod ►..va+r IRF s a. rain A m o.ns.o aIt jeugs. Conti on du a NNNM .SGIO M A R� / AI1lIR>tiI A o fmft ml I000 by INN(YYYY�NIM-DO) BtRIRelew burr/ s pohav Ru brae tsps er uaslDas is iRIpwlRd awRIRPr(ewNaploiwasOfrOiCMrrenrM) sherry PmI r. , 1 201'5 5-13 IE ITTTT4M1;W) 2015-05=13 Paat®tn�IllfRill MA4.0 rrr m rens, a Or "m sw W6are Caeeercaeen Peg I—, W v—W a OmO W W Pwwe vr.d!falr, .,— Plawidrp mor ..�..o..eleRelwssenraae� teeRap._rfwar,+ntwmeuaeiw�e�ar,e�ea®,.rww ,w,rrry,rmre pRmloiRo i«� w wo,®. e! 1 a R = r P brats, du prrai a• m rewi4 .00r . r 01 errd emsrn Reese URM a P od%dNeWftWm. CrppOmlm dr MFMW r 0910m aw nwovvar de nmWOe vRi iWrlrR a 6 wr�ea Vw,Oea........�.o..o me Ie dirty etrelR W RtO1 pin ew11eR Pwmer.=�.-dwveemone. FWC= (041001 Licence m Collect Fish for Scientific Purposes Permis pour faire la coilouts de poissons i des flns scientifigous Schedule A - Licertuo, conditions Annum A - conddions du pemde U=Meft Noes palms lum an Thi Uwnce s su*ct to oa iffi lwm m1w �iir. 1. This U ' a R a IS vaua MY fat ae 130190fii; species, ndmbers, areas W4 calendar year I diceled. A wrow report aovermg i e opwason of the preceding year mist be submitted w the low= isamr www 3c asp of Qe tmmhft n dale, bul In no case Ntsr alert renunry 31 noxi ro 0=9 Oi8 >GN al' SM Tre report shall contain a statement ocdlbtbng tits objectives IF are rperatione, the mWil lodo um. Mie rwmber and epodes of fish cougm = Qtak fats ns wen So o map liiaicasng where the ededione took 00—M An armlyais Is I01 recIdred. Tne t MI11i1101 of a MUMMY report W a prerequir fie to any subsequent renewals. z. Biles contx,ry out mry wwadat under ft urn rtee Rf any 8100111011"1 Cad person itreu Irowln ce Area 3upwvWw or Lake manoW of his or her intrad lone In � a va" 1�11 om mm=V vrorx fill k dude bdfonnetlmd as w ata type of operatbn, to FAIR .9-a . ilia dna nems or names of par0oretel Involved. 3. A ixlpr of rite origbdal Uoenca must fib cameo oy its tiMmsord wnwt wwam at 11te designated sites. An a 0111101111-0 C-0 porion erne 19 CeIrl" cut vic5 l W under Qde Hoonce ddabtg the absence rA me licenced pwson tRiSli . a.v a law w -f the bene an his or her parswr 4. Ab collect1w gear lintel ce an ny momw wtn Qts owaa poison's and the organa mews name. 5. This Ucenrs is not vabl Rf Provincial Pon. wrwervation rww.wti or Iaanonm Parks wl0todd the w lion pwmEtlII51`1 from dw eu11 person is mwge oUf Qts area cortomrned. U. c: Pw yam, srse ee now= spud* and an f1ming traps n111!!I be Inspected >E rpt once =W. �. r vas Ucm>cs does 7si arrow acosss b any pmpargy vd11noul pmamb elwt of the 0105Wller. Additional �rw le fti t wnlyp G P1111f11 ace w Conwrota amt =ndlaans I. M parmis nest vabde gore pour M personnel, sepias, nomores, ames et onnie dobe Irdquis. Un rapport 6cdl portant as las 111 cm 13ibiii pfMeme doe ilre nuumis su ddWw du pgmms mans M 3a pea I ttuvwd is oade a'expiroom at>oinew W lard qua Is 31 farmer qul at la data ds dillvvrence. C5 rapport awm oomprendre une dAdonillo t dicrivant las objeelifs des acorea, lis m6lbodes utlYawes, b nombre at In espices de poissons captures at lar destinamm ansa ml gdrom carte montrent romplaeament des eoll ctre. One anaryse Was pas wase. LA Ulm rapport sefisfaleard an— Una condidw pour caamr an renouvellement de perms. Z Arend de miser buts ace to vrsee per E pomts darns mwe zone, IS eaamre au Piffiffi dolt aviser le supwWaour de la zone ou Is geseonnwre au Iw, ae on bdarglone au areata cute samalne am de Commencer on Nal9w at U W11 twlnw des rensmgnemwht9 err le We d'adiriti, fern, b dune is is turn as mutes Me mimes 3. Le tiarlatrs du 000 dolt wok an so possession an exemplatra ou pemt� engine lorequ'b trsttral11e dards 100 ertdrolts dish. re un aaJant as 1Mutlitnh r!n prenrnls its a a� adwile vieies par le permit an rim ao tNtdatre av pestle, U cairn a.wir an exA Plabe du permis en as possessim 4. Tout 19=16 1 oa Meow eat inoiquar bleu dslremi —M ie nun du Weirs du perms Wg de son organisms. 5. Ce Pestis n asci pas vabde t%. las pg,,, pruvrndaU& IN RNIM ae parts at 100 para nadoneuu sate is permission 9cdte w is personne autorsbe qui ata reopatsoble de le zone an quesoon. 8. Toru le matiriel as ilouW1151111eue inspedi reguueremeM at 100 vMers doivertt Atre Ir apeorn rw moms urge M parJoUU. i. ce pwmis na Perot pas au Weirs ifamir atm ii une proprM pnvee Sons 13 pemdss M du Woprbtaire (on=. vs. mite iouawriy may 00slet under the authority of tree activity or redds be observed re somplsg mast R stopped Dow= Nrc Foam I ow -n tt, Kalle Eestetflng, Ri dear to prevent dlshabonce w No liah in01t>ta care. Merle Bojorsld. 0. Gear E r mmm w: etaOcpaC1C wacrann rtg urA dip nets, sabre nets, boat eloolmnaner, short ancon gui nets. 10. The , =i and am p rswmel Involved in the cokcdon, harrdling, aanspwmaoon i1fW holdug of fish MW ad etre ro me FWwdn Section Toehnl al B9—wn - Bad arauwpameiu P comes - BMP FS &MGM 2011-01. 11. On to potmdia) spawning BCtirdy iq 1fle15eft or migratory nen apeass, vbnwl inspection of all aempkV areas mus! be done prior w same W Slice spall g Signature of Uuuncee / Signature w ttwlelre iso pemlle 12. Shocrld the kerne capbue Soy not 9130000 -e1 -risk (swi), the nay kWnWIWdon dtmaelew for me sp11N1111 smil M photographed (if poesy) and reported to an Aylmer Dlsbld Management BkdogEL wW RiiB wormy mgm rrarvrddal OF a spades at tisk shall be Immediately mkmW W*Wmea w me woswserror vttdch It was caught. 13. unless authorized gilder the Endw*ew spsu00 Act (ESA), no pwson IMil tier for iyM10810ned or endangered flah species. Dere Licence to Collect Fish fbar Scientific Purpwmm Permis pwur faire is colla -- e do pulssons I des fins sclontHiques Schedule A - Ucence Conditions AnMAv A - GWOMM au parmts U=nwWU. Is FM pww Iur ow 14. �nPM IbZII1>aibII MUST W reponea asarg UP811=9on = using: pmjecdcm: Qniversel I nmsvwse Mercator (UrMr Datum: tbM American 11183 (NAD83), Condign Tre�nneNW (URT); omits: i IN; OW: MGM. 15. any pwm Stang under the authority of Ifft Ifom s, 90 mmmoweW report me capture � any � sp� (e.g. ndfe, amwrose gobyaoWM goby. rmy crayfleh. Aslan carp, etc.) bard outside Its prevwAy knovm mrW (es I= um by- me amougm avauame l! www.l dI gspedee.cw*xIewm.cltn, to the apprvpr W Area BW W at the kwel MNRF Dlatrl3 afte. any such spearena copaaeo 01=1111 cr mea• emamisne0 range jnm already natiaa8aed) Shap be euthardxed (trot retuned to the vrater) and W Ter wanamemm porprraw. Pres—mm br Kim"— gym, tom, am wTrarre amim apeaassr a-owf/3.9T11 signeture of Uoeni-;�v- ! Signature du titulafre du permis on Date ONTARIO PARKS 659 Exeter Road 4`" Floor London, ON WE 1 L3 Tel: 519-873-4615 Fax:519-873-4645 www.OntarioParks.com Letter of Authorization to Conduct Research in a Provincial Park or Conservation Reserve May 15, 2015 Issued to: Kelly Mason Stantec Consulting Ltd. 70 Southgate Drive Suite 1 Guelph, ON N1G 4P5 Authorization Valid: May 15, 2015 to June 30, 2015 Project Title: Port Burwell Small Craft Harbours Risk Assessment This letter is issued as authorization for the undertaking identified within the Application to Conduct Research submitted to MNRF (see Appendix A). This authorization is valid in the following provincial parks and/or conservation reserves: Protected Area Designated Contact Phone Email Port Burwell Provincial Rhonda Card, Park (519) 874-4691 Rhonda. card @ontario.ca Park Superintendent 221 This authorization letter will serve for park access and identification for the following persons while conducting your research: Principal Investigator: Kelly Mason Field personnel: Marc Faiella, Nathan Burnett This authorization to conduct research is subject to the following terms and conditions: Project Specific Conditions Contact the designated Ontario Parks staff person(s) listed above at least ten (10) days prior to visiting the park to initiate your research. L�' Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry Ontario General Conditions 2. The MNRF, including Ontario Parks, reserves the right to suspend, cancel, restrict the scope, or impose additional terms and conditions at any time during the research project. 3. It is the responsibility of the principal investigator to secure and maintain in good standing any other required authorizations and permits prior to initiating field research. 4. The principle investigator is responsible for all members of their field research team. All related field personnel must also observe all conditions of this authorization. 5. Research authorization cannot be transferred to a third party without the prior written consent of MNRF. 6. The principal investigator and/or their field persons are not authorized to construct any facility, building or other devices unless as specifically authorized through a formal agreement with the MNRF. While conducting research the principal investigator and field person will 7. Carry a legible copy of this authorization letter on their persons while conducting research in the protected area(s). All field personnel must be in possession of a valid authorization letter before the field work commences and at other periods as stated in the authorization letter. 8. Conduct the research activities in a manner that protects the health and safety of researchers, other visitors, and MNRF staff. If there are any questions regarding health and safety concerns, please contact the designated protected area contact person listed above to discuss the project prior to commencing field work. 9. Leave no garbage or other materials on site, and take care to avoid any impacts to natural or cultural values. 10. Remove all field markers (e.g., flagging tape) at the end of the project. 11. Fill and restore all sample pits, excavations and holes to as natural a state as possible. 12. Not be accompanied by domestic animals (e.g., dogs) in the protected area. Any exceptions must be discussed with the designated contact listed above prior to arrival at the protected area. 13. Clean all clothing, equipment (e.g. vehicles, boats, sampling gear, etc.) and personal gear prior to and after sampling within protected areas, including waterbodies and watercourses, to prevent the introduction and spread of aquatic or terrestrial alien/invasive species. This also applies after sampling in one location within a protected area (e.g. a waterbody) and before sampling in another area (e.g. another waterbody) in a protected area to prevent transfer within, between or out of protected areas. Species-specific information and best practices are available at http://www.invadingsr)ecies.com. 14. Carry out all activities in such a way that the rights, privileges, privacy and enjoyment of park visitors are not infringed upon during the course of research activities. 15. Inform any park visitors encountered in the field while research activities are being carried out regarding the nature of the research project. Collection Conditions 16. The collection of fish voucher samples (whole fish) as requested in application is permitted. Deposit all voucher specimens, artefacts, materials (property of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario) to the repository indicated in your application, or surrender such materials to the MNRF. 17. The collection of any other natural or cultural materials is prohibited. If you encounter any natural or cultural materials during your work in the protected area that may be previously unknown, you will notify the protected area contact indicated above, within 24 hours. 18. All location information will be collected in NAD83 UTM. Reporting Requirements 19. A digital copy of all raw data collected during the 2014 field season, as well as any interim reports developed during that time, must be submitted to melody. cairns ontario.ca with a copy to pa.science aC)ontario.ca by December 31, 2015. a. Raw data will be provided in the format specified by the approvers. If no format is specified, standard NHIC reporting spreadsheets shall be used. b. The requirement to provide raw data and reports annually as outlined is a condition of continued work in subsequent field seasons, and for future research projects by the applicant, including new personnel working under the Principle Investigator. c. All location information will be submitted in NAD83 UTM. d. Data submitted will only be used internally by the MNRF for protected area management purposes. 20. After project completion, a digital copy of all final research reports will be submitted to melody. cairns(& ontario.ca with a copy to pa.science(Montario.ca by December 31, 2015 Some research projects may require additional permits or approvals (e.g., MNRF Wildlife Scientific Collector Authorization, Endangered Species Act, 2007 permit, a Licence to Conduct Archaeological Fieldwork). Principal Investigators and authorized field personnel must obtain and follow the terms and conditions of every permit or authorization required for the research project. For questions regarding this authorization, please contact Melody Cairns, Southwest Zone Ecologist at melody. cairns ontario.ca or 519-873-4632. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions will result in the withdrawal of authorization and termination of the research project. The MNRF reserves the right to impose additional terms and conditions at any time during the term of the research project. Authorized by aa Manager, Southwest Zone, Ontario Parks C.C. Melody Cairns, Southwest Zone Ecologist Rhonda Card, Park Superintendent, Port Burwell Provincial Park Michelle Smith, Administrative Assistant, Southwest Zone, Ontario Parks Jonathan Agaton, A/Protected Areas Research Analyst APPENDIX `A' — Application to Conduct Research From: Ontario Parks fmaiIto: do-not-reply@ontarioparks.com] Sent: April 15, 2015 2:38 PM To: Protected Area Science (MNRF) Subject: Ontario Parks Application - Kelly Mason Applicant Name: Kelly Mason Affiliation: Stantec Consulting Ltd. Email Address: kelly.masonPstantec.com Business Address: 70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1, Guelph, Ontario, N1G 4P5 Business Phone: 519-780-8126 Business Fax: Home Address: Home Phone: Home Fax: Project Title: Port Burwell Small Craft Harbours Risk Assessment Project Location: Port Burwell Provincial Park (offshore area in Lake Erie) Project Details: The purpose of the proposed project is to complete a site-specific risk assessment (SSRA)for Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to determine if there are any unacceptable risks to human health and/or ecological health arising from exposure to contaminants of potential concern (COPCs)identified at the Small Craft Harbours site. The offshore area of Port Burwell Provincial Park may be used as a Reference Area for the study and sampling may extend into the park boundary. General Outline: Fish collections in the offshore area may be collected and would represent 'reference' conditions. Whole fish are required, as tissue samples will be collected and submitted for tissue analysis. Procedures: Fish will be collected using a combination of methods that may include a boat electrofisher, backpack electrofisher, short -duration gillnets and dip nets. There is no expected impact to the park environment. From Date: May 01, 2015 To Date: June 30, 2015 Park Visitors Involved: n/a Assistance from MNR: n/a Consultants from MNR: n/a Licences Held: Request for Licence to Collect Fish for Scientific Purposes (submitted to Aylmer District MNRF April 15, 2015) Performance Bonding: No Persons Assisting: Marc Faiella- Aquatic Ecologist with Class 1 Electrofishing certification Nathan Burnett- Aquatic Ecologist with Class 2 Electrofishing certification Kelly Mason- Aquatic Ecologist with Class 1 Electrofishing certification The address of all staff members is :70 Southgate Drive, Suite 1, Guelph Ontario, N1G 4P5 The staff members listed above will be responsible for fish collections for tissue analysis. Contributors: n/a Final Report Date: January 01, 2016 Applicant Agrees to abide by terms: Yes Date: April 15, 2015 Signature: Signature of Course Director or Advisor or, if applicable, Agency/Company President, Chairperson or Manager: Date Approved: Granted Admin: Approval Granted: Supervisor Signature: Date Manager Signature: Manager Provincial Parks Planning and Research Date: Conditions: Conditions of approval if applicable: Validation: Valid From/To: LIMITED SUPPLEMENTAL PHASE II ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT - AQUATIC LOT Appendix E Laboratory Certificates of Analyses September 11, 2015 Appenalx LABORATORY CERTIFI-.AiCJ %jr Al-4Hk ® Stantec v:\01225\active\122511075\reports\ra\final\app_i_phase_ii_esa\rpt_port_burwell_aquatic_esa_fnl.docx E.1 Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 MAXXAM JOB #: 65A0198 Received: 2015/05/28, 12:28 Sample Matrix: TISSUE # Samples Received: 21 Analyses Success Through Science Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: na Report Date: 2015/07/06 Report #: R3563842 Version: 2 - Revision CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT Date Date Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Mercury in Tissue by CVAA 21 N/A 2015/06/10 CAM SOP -0453 Health Canada Method Metals in Tissue by ICPMS 16 N/A 2015/06/09 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020/200.3 m Metals in Tissue by ICPMS 4 N/A 2015/06/10 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020/200.3 m Metals in Tissue by ICPMS 1 N/A 2015/06/15 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020/200.3 m Percent Lipid Content 11 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 In House Percent Lipid Content 10 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 In House OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue (1) 6 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue (1) 14 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue (1) 1 2015/06/27 2015/07/03 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 21 N/A 2015/06/09 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 Moisture 21 N/A 2015/06/08 CAM SOP -00715 AOAC methodology Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) Sample(s) analyzed using methodologies that have not been subjected to Maxxam's standard validation process for the submitted matrix and is not an Accredited method. Analysis performed with client consent, however results should be viewed with discretion Page 1 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: na Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B5AO198 Received: 2015/05/28, 12:28 Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Shaun Nowickyj, Customer Service Email: SNowickyj@maxxam.ca Phone# (905)817-5830 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/06 Report #: R3563842 Version: 2 - Revision Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total Cover Pages : 2 Page 2 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF TISSUE Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS099 AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 AIS103 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na na Units EXP -WS -01 EXP -WS -01 Lab-Dup EXP -WS -02 EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 RDL EXP -CC -03 QC Batch Lab-Dup Miscellaneous Parameters Fat (gravimetric) % 1.8 2.0 1.6 1.2 1 Fat (gravimetric) % 1.0 Nutritional Parameters 0.40 3.5 1 9.5 1 2.4 1 N/A 1.9 4058023 Nutritional Parameters Moisture g/100g 78.8 80.1 77.2 81.3 77.9 77.2 0.1 1 4055888 Moisture g/100g 84.2 1 83.5 1 82.3 1 76.0 1 70.3 1 79.0 1 0.1 1 4055888 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate N/A = Not Applicable Maxxam ID AIS104 AIS105 AIS106 AIS107 AIS108 AIS109 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units I REFI-COMPl REFI-COMP2 REF1-COMP3 REFI-COMP4 REFI -COMPS REFI-COMP6 RDL QC Batch Miscellaneous Parameters Fat (gravimetric) % 1.8 2.0 1.6 1.2 1 1.9 1 2.5 I N/A 4058023 Nutritional Parameters Moisture g/100g 78.8 80.1 77.2 81.3 77.9 77.2 0.1 1 4055888 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch N/A = Not Applicable Maxxam ID AIS110 AIS111 AIS112 AIS113 AIS114 AIS114 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units REF2-COMP1 REF2-COMP2 REF2-YP-01 REFlYP-01 REF -I -WB -01 RDL REF -I -WB -01 QC Batch Lab-Dup Miscellaneous Parameters Fat (gravimetric) % 1.3 2.3 0.10 1 0.30 1 3.3 1 N/A 3.4 1 4061206 Nutritional Parameters Moisture g/100g 74.5 1 76.1 1 79.6 1 79.9 1 74.6 1 0.1 4055888 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate N/A = Not Applicable Page 3 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF TISSUE Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS115 AIS116 AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 AIS119 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 EXP -ES -04 QC Batch EXP -ES -05 EXP -ES -05 RDL QC Batch Lab-Dup Miscellaneous Parameters Fat (gravimetric) % 2.2 2.6 1 2.8 1 3.3 1 4061206 2.9 1 1 N/A 4061206 Nutritional Parameters Moisture g/100g 80.0 79.9 1 77.6 1 77.1 1 4055888 78.1 1 77.7 1 0.1 1 4056193 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 4 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS099 AIS100 AIS100 AIS101 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na Units EXP -WS -01 RDL QC Batch EXP -WS -02 EXP -WS -02 Lab-Dup RDL QC Batch EXP -CC -01 RDL QC Batch Metals Mercury (Hg) ug/g 0.12 0.005 4055842 0.12 0.12 0.005 4055844 0.15 0.005 4055842 Arsenic (As) ug/g <0.1 0.1 4055816 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 4055817 <0.1 0.1 4055816 Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.05 0.05 4055816 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055817 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Barium (Ba) ug/g <0.3 0.3 4055816 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055817 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.05 0.05 4055816 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055817 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <0.05 0.05 4055816 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055817 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Boron (B) ug/g <0.5 0.5 4055816 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4055817 <0.5 0.5 4055816 Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.01 0.01 4055816 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 4055817 0.02 0.01 4055816 Calcium (Ca) ug/g 400 50 4055816 130 210 50 4055817 69 50 4055816 Chromium (Cr) ug/g <0.3 0.3 4055816 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055817 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Cobalt (Co) ug/g <0.005 0.005 4055816 0.009 0.008 0.005 4055817 0.012 0.005 4055816 Copper (Cu) ug/g <0.5 0.5 4055816 0.5 0.5 0.5 4055817 1.7 0.5 4055816 Iron (Fe) ug/g 6 3 4055816 9 9 3 4055817 29 3 4055816 Lead (Pb) ug/g <0.03 0.03 4055816 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4055817 <0.03 0.03 4055816 Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 230 100 4055816 260 270 100 4055817 240 100 4055816 Manganese (Mn) ug/g 0.3 0.3 4055816 <0.3 1 <0.3 0.3 4055817 <0.3 0.3 1 4055816 Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.05 0.05 4055816 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055817 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Nickel (Ni) ug/g <0.05 0.05 4055816 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055817 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Phosphorus (P) ug/g 2100 300 4055816 2400 2400 500 4055817 2300 300 4055816 Potassium (K) ug/g 3500 100 4055816 4700 4700 100 4055817 3800 100 4055816 Selenium (Se) ug/g 0.5 0.1 4055816 0.5 0.5 0.1 4055817 0.8 0.1 4055816 Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.05 0.05 4055816 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055817 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Sodium (Na) ug/g 570 50 4055816 350 350 50 4055817 440 50 4055816 Strontium (Sr) ug/g <0.5 0.5 4055816 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4055817 <0.5 0.5 4055816 Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.003 0.003 4055816 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 4055817 <0.003 0.003 4055816 Tin (Sn) ug/g <0.3 0.3 4055816 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055817 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Titanium (Ti) ug/g 1.7 0.5 4055816 2.0 2.0 0.5 4055817 1.9 0.5 4055816 Uranium (U) ug/g 0.007 0.005 4055816 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 4055817 <0.005 0.005 4055816 Vanadium (V) ug/g <0.3 0.3 1 4055816 <0.3 <0.3 1 0.3 4055817 <0.3 1 0.3 4055816 Zinc (Zn) ug/g 4 2 4055816 3 4 2 4055817 16 2 4055816 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 5 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS102 AIS103 AIS103 AIS104 AIS105 AIS106 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 EXP -CC -03 Lab-Dup RDL REFI-COMP1 REFI-COMP2 REF1-COMP3 RDL QC Batch Metals Mercury (Hg) ug/g 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.005 0.049 0.034 0.038 0.005 4055842 Arsenic (As) ug/g 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.1 0.1 4055816 Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Barium (Ba) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 1.2 0.3 4055816 Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Boron (B) ug/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4055816 Cadmium (Cd) ug/g 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.01 4055816 Calcium (Ca) ug/g 78 76 73 50 5900 4700 4700 50 4055816 Chromium (Cr) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Cobalt (Co) ug/g 0.009 0.011 0.011 0.005 0.005 0.007 0.020 0.005 4055816 Copper (Cu) ug/g 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.5 <0.5 0.6 0.8 0.5 4055816 Iron (Fe) ug/g 16 19 18 3 10 12 25 3 4055816 Lead (Pb) ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 4055816 Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 250 240 240 100 290 280 310 100 4055816 Manganese (Mn) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 1.9 1.7 2.0 0.3 4055816 Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Nickel (Ni) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 1 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 1 0.05 4055816 Phosphorus (P) ug/g 2200 2300 2300 300 4800 4200 4100 500 4055816 Potassium (K) ug/g 3700 3900 3900 100 3100 3100 3000 100 4055816 Selenium (Se) ug/g 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 4055816 Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Sodium (Na) ug/g 330 430 430 50 750 710 760 50 4055816 Strontium (Sr) ug/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 6.4 5.1 6.7 0.5 4055816 Thallium (TI) ug/g 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.003 0.006 0.008 0.004 0.003 4055816 Tin (Sn) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Titanium (Ti) ug/g 1.9 1.8 1.9 0.5 3.9 3.6 3.8 0.5 4055816 Uranium (U) ug/g <0.005 0.007 <0.005 0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 4055816 Vanadium (V) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Zinc (Zn) ug/g 13 8 8 2 20 26 23 2 4055816 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 6 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS107 AIS108 AIS109 AIS110 AIS111 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na Units REFI-COMP4 REFI -COMPS RDL REFI-COMP6 RDL REF2-COMP1 REF2-COMP2 RDL QC Batch Metals Mercury (Hg) ug/g 0.055 0.030 0.005 0.045 0.005 0.054 0.030 0.005 4055842 Arsenic (As) ug/g 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 4055816 Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Barium (Ba) ug/g 0.6 1.1 0.3 2.0 0.3 2.6 1.6 0.3 4055816 Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Boron (B) ug/g <0.5 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4055816 Cadmium (Cd) ug/g 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.01 4055816 Calcium (Ca) ug/g 4400 6000 50 12000 50 8500 9300 50 4055816 Chromium (Cr) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Cobalt (Co) ug/g 0.007 0.014 0.005 0.012 0.005 0.037 0.028 0.005 4055816 Copper (Cu) ug/g <0.5 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.5 4055816 Iron (Fe) ug/g 16 20 3 15 3 100 37 3 4055816 Lead (Pb) ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.11 0.04 0.03 4055816 Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 260 340 100 400 100 370 370 100 4055816 Manganese (Mn) ug/g 1.5 2.1 0.3 2.6 0.3 6.7 2.9 0.3 4055816 Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Nickel (Ni) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Phosphorus (P) ug/g 3800 4900 500 7600 1000 4900 6800 500 4055816 Potassium (K) ug/g 2800 2800 100 2700 100 3000 2900 100 4055816 Selenium (Se) ug/g 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.1 4055816 Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Sodium (Na) ug/g 540 520 50 690 50 840 730 50 4055816 Strontium (Sr) ug/g 5.1 7.9 0.5 14 0.5 13 12 0.5 1 4055816 Thallium (TI) ug/g 0.005 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.003 4055816 Tin (Sn) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Titanium (Ti) ug/g 3.0 4.3 0.5 6.3 0.5 4.9 5.4 0.5 4055816 Uranium (U) ug/g 0.009 <0.005 0.005 <0.005 0.005 <0.005 0.007 0.005 4055816 Vanadium (V) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Zinc (Zn) ug/g 1 28 1 23 2 24 2 25 1 27 2 4055816 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 7 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS112 AIS113 AIS114 AIS115 AIS116 AIS117 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units REF2-YP-01 REFlYP-01 REF -I -WB -01 RDL EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 EXP -ES -03 RDL QC Batch Metals Mercury (Hg) ug/g 0.040 0.058 0.10 0.005 0.022 0.027 0.036 0.005 4055842 Arsenic (As) ug/g <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 4055816 Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Barium (Ba) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 2.2 1.4 1.4 0.3 4055816 Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Boron (B) ug/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4055816 Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.06 0.06 0.08 0.01 4055816 Calcium (Ca) ug/g 380 1000 920 50 9500 6400 8200 50 4055816 Chromium (Cr) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Cobalt (Co) ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 0.052 0.028 0.032 0.005 4055816 Copper (Cu) ug/g <0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.5 4055816 Iron (Fe) ug/g 4 4 5 3 140 60 76 3 4055816 Lead (Pb) ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 0.09 0.04 0.06 0.03 4055816 Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 290 300 290 100 450 350 410 100 4055816 Manganese (Mn) ug/g <0.3 0.7 0.4 0.3 7.8 4.2 5.4 0.3 4055816 Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Nickel (Ni) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 0.13 0.05 0.07 0.05 4055816 Phosphorus (P) ug/g 2400 2900 2500 300 6300 5200 6000 500 4055816 Potassium (K) ug/g 4200 4200 3800 100 2900 3000 3100 100 4055816 Selenium (Se) ug/g 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.1 4055816 Silver(Ag) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Sodium (Na) ug/g 300 320 370 50 670 640 740 50 4055816 Strontium (Sr) ug/g <0.5 0.6 1.0 0.5 15 11 13 0.5 1 4055816 Thallium (TI) ug/g 0.010 0.015 0.024 0.003 0.006 0.005 0.004 0.003 4055816 Tin (Sn) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Titanium (Ti) ug/g 2.0 2.4 2.1 0.5 7.5 4.8 5.9 0.5 4055816 Uranium (U) ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 0.006 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 4055816 Vanadium (V) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 1 0.3 1 4055816 Zinc (Zn) ug/g 6 7 5 2 59 55 61 2 1 4055816 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 8 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (TISSUE) Maxxam ID AIS118 AIS119 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na Units EXP -ES -04 EXP -ES -05 RDL QC Batch Metals Mercury (Hg) ug/g 0.035 0.042 0.005 4055842 Arsenic (As) ug/g 0.1 0.1 0.1 4055816 Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Barium (Ba) ug/g 1.7 1.6 0.3 4055816 Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Boron (B) ug/g <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4055816 Cadmium (Cd) ug/g 0.05 0.06 0.01 4055816 Calcium (Ca) ug/g 8200 7700 50 4055816 Chromium (Cr) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Cobalt (Co) ug/g 0.036 0.041 0.005 4055816 Copper (Cu) ug/g 0.8 1.0 0.5 4055816 Iron (Fe) ug/g 83 110 3 4055816 Lead (Pb) ug/g 0.06 0.07 0.03 4055816 Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 400 420 100 4055816 Manganese (Mn) ug/g 5.6 5.9 0.3 4055816 Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Nickel (Ni) ug/g 0.08 0.10 0.05 4055816 Phosphorus (P) ug/g 5900 5800 500 4055816 Potassium (K) ug/g 3000 3000 100 4055816 Selenium (Se) ug/g 0.6 0.6 0.1 4055816 Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.05 <0.05 0.05 4055816 Sodium (Na) ug/g 740 750 50 4055816 Strontium (Sr) ug/g 14 12 0.5 4055816 Thallium (TI) ug/g 0.005 0.006 0.003 4055816 Tin (Sn) ug/g <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Titanium (Ti) ug/g 6.2 6.2 0.5 4055816 Uranium (U) ug/g <0.005 <0.005 0.005 4055816 Vanadium (V) ug/g I <0.3 <0.3 0.3 4055816 Zinc (Zn) ug/g 65 67 2 4055816 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 9 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na Units EXP -WS -01 RDL QC Batch EXP -WS -02 QC Batch EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 0.12 0.06 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 0.03 <0.02 1 <0.02 0.021 4041541 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 0.09 0.06 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.03 0.03 4041541 <0.03 4041541 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4041541 Total PCB ug/g <0.03 0.03 4041541 0.04 4041541 0.45 0.50 0.30 0.03 4041541 Pesticides & Herbicides Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Aldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 beta -BHC ug/g_ <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 delta -BHC ug/g <0.02 10.02 4057040 1 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 0.03 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 0.09 0.06 <0.02 0.02 4057040 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Heptachlor ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Lindane ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.08 0.08 4057040 <0.08 4070513 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.08 4057040 Mirex ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 10 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS099 AIS100 AIS101 AIS102 AIS103 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na Units EXP -WS -01 RDL QC Batch EXP -WS -02 QC Batch EXP -CC -01 EXP -CC -02 EXP -CC -03 RDL QC Batch Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.02 0.02 4057040 <0.02 4070513 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 0.14 0.21 0.08 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 0.04 4070513 0.31 0.29 0.21 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4057040 <0.03 4070513 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Toxaphene ug/g <0.5 0.5 4057040 <0.5 4070513 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4057040 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 31 4057040 58 4070513 53 42 35 4057040 Decachlorobiphenyl % 57 4057040 80 4070513 78 73 67 4057040 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 11 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS103 AIS104 AIS105 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na Units EXP -CC -03 Lab-Dup QC Batch REF1-COMP1 RDL QC Batch REFI-COMP2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Chlordane (Total) ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Total Endosulfan ug/g 4041541 <0.03 0.03 4041541 <0.03 0.03 4041541 Total PCB ug/g 1 4041541 0.08 0.03 4041541 <0.05 0.05 4041541 Pesticides & Herbicides Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Aldrin ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 beta -BHC ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 delta -BHC ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 1 <0.02 0.02 4057040 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 10.02 4057040 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endrin ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Heptachlor ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Heptachlor epoxide ug /g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Lindane ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.08 4057040 <0.08 0.08 4070513 <0.08 0.08 4057040 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 12 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS103 AIS104 AIS105 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na Units EXP -CC -03 Lab-Dup QC Batch REFI-COMP1 RDL QC Batch REFI-COMP2 RDL QC Batch Mirex ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 0.02 4057040 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.05 0.05 4057040 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.05 0.05 4057040 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.05 0.05 4057040 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 1 <0.05 0.05 4057040 Aroclor 1254 ug/g 0.10 4057040 0.04 0.03 4070513 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1260 ug/g 0.26 4057040 0.05 0.03 4070513 0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 0.03 4057040 Toxaphene ug/g <0.5 4057040 <0.5 0.5 4070513 <0.5 0.5 4057040 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 40 4057040 58 4070513 33 4057040 Decachlorobiphenyl % 68 4057040 75 4070513 63 4057040 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 13 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS106 AIS107 AIS108 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na Units REF1-COMP3 RDL QC Batch REF1-COMP4 QC Batch REF1-COMP5 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.04 0.03 4041541 <0.02 4041541 0.02 0.02 4041541 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g I <0.03 0.03 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.04 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.03 0.03 4041541 <0.03 4041541 <0.03 0.03 4041541 Total PCB ug/g 0.16 0.03 4041541 0.13 4041541 0.12 0.03 4041541 Pesticides & Herbicides Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 beta -BHC ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 delta -BHC ug/g 1 <0.02 0.021 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDE ug/g 1 0.04 0.021 4070513 <0.02 40570401 0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin aldehyde ug/g 1 <0.03 0.031 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Lindane ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.08 0.08 4070513 <0.08 4057040 <0.08 0.08 4070513 Mirex ug/g <0.05 0.05 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 14 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS106 AIS107 AIS108 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na Units REFI-COMP3 RDL QC Batch REFI-COMP4 QC Batch REFI-COMP5 RDL QC Batch Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.02 0.02 4070513 <0.02 4057040 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Total PCB ug/g 0.06 4057040 0.03 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1242 ug/g 1 <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1254 ug/g 0.07 0.03 4070513 0.06 4057040 0.04 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1260 ug/g 0.09 0.03 4070513 0.07 4057040 0.08 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.03 0.03 4070513 <0.03 4057040 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1268 1 ug/g 1 <0.03 10.031 4070513 1 <0.03 1 4057040 <0.03 10.031 4070513 Toxaphene ug/g <1 1 1 4070513 1 <0.5 1 4057040 <0.5 15.5 1 4070513 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 58 1 1 4070513 1 36 1 4057040 64 1 1 4070513 Decachlorobiphenyl % 65 1 1 4070513 1 70 1 40570401 67 1 1 4070513 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 15 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS109 AIS109 AIS110 AIS111 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na Units REFI-COMP6 REFI-COMP6 Lab-Dup RDL QC Batch REF2-COMPI RDL REF2-COMP2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.04 0.02 4041541 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 4041541 Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g 1 <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.04 0.02 4041541 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 4041541 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.03 0.03 4041541 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4041541 Total PCB ug/g 0.2 0.1 4041541 0.19 0.03 0.09 0.03 4041541 Pesticides & Herbicides Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aldrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 beta -BHC ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 delta -BHC ug/g I <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDE ug/g 1 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.04 0.04 0.02 4084415 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g 1 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Endrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Lindane ug/g 1 <0.02 1 <0.02 10.021 4084415 1 <0.02 10.021 <0.02 10.021 4070513 Methoxychlor ug/g 1 <0.08 1 <0.08 10.081 4084415 1 <0.08 10.081 <0.08 10.081 4070513 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 16 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS109 AIS109 AIS110 AIS111 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na Units REFI-COMP6 REFI-COMP6 Lab-Dup RDL QC Batch REF2-COMPI RDL REF2-COMP2 RDL QC Batch Mirex ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4084415 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.1 <0.1 0.1 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.1 <0.1 0.1 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.1 <0.1 0.1 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1254 ug/g 0.06 0.07 0.03 4084415 0.08 0.03 0.04 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1260 ug/g 0.10 0.10 0.03 4084415 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4084415 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Toxaphene ug/g <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4084415 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 0.5 4070513 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 59 58 4084415 1 67 1 1 59 1 4070513 Decachlorobiphenyl % 71 67 4084415 1 79 1 1 67 1 14070513 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 17 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS112 AIS113 AIS114 AIS114 AIS115 AIS116 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units REF2-YP-01 REFlYP-01 REF -I -WB -01 REF -1 -WB -.01 Lab-Dup EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4041541 Total PCB ug/g <0.03 1 <0.03 1 0.09 0.08 0.14 0.03 4041541 Pesticides & Herbicides Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aldrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 beta -BHC ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 delta -BHC ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Lindane ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 0.08 4070513 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 18 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS112 AIS113 AIS114 AIS114 AIS115 AIS116 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na na na na Units REF2-YP-01 REFlYP-01 REF -I -WB -01 REF -I -WB -01 Lab-Dup EXP -ES -01 EXP -ES -02 RDL QC Batch Mirex ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.08 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Toxaphene ug/g <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.5 4070513 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 56 37 68 60 55 56 4070513 Decachlorobiphenyl % 78 68 100 86 63 75 4070513 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 19 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na Units EXP -ES -03 RDL EXP -ES -04 RDL EXP -ES -05 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4041541 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4041541 Total PCB ug/g 0.18 0.03 0.11 0.03 0.14 0.03 4041541 Pesticides & Herbicides Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 beta -BHC ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 delta -BHC ug/g 1 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDE ug/g 1 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Dieldrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endosulfan II ug/g 1 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.05 0.05 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.05 0.05 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Lindane ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.1 0.1 <0.08 0.08 <0.08 0.08 4070513 Mirex ug/g <0.05 0.05 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 20 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ORGANOCHLORI NATED PESTICIDES BY GC -ECD (TISSUE) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AIS117 AIS118 AIS119 Sampling Date 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 2015/05/19 COC Number na na na Units EXP -ES -03 RDL EXP -ES -04 RDL EXP -ES -05 RDL QC Batch Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 <0.02 0.02 4070513 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1248 ug/g 1 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1254 ug/g 0.12 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.08 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1260 ug/g 0.07 0.03 0.05 0.03 0.06 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 <0.03 0.03 4070513 Toxaphene ug/g <2 2 <1 (1) 1 <0.5 0.5 4070513 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 48 58 64 4070513 Decachlorobiphenyl % 55 68 76 4070513 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch (1) Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Page 21 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS099 Sample ID: EXP -WS -01 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Success Through Science Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICPl/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Automated Statchk Moisture Matrix: 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS099 Dup Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -WS -01 Shipped: ICP1/MS Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst 2015/06/09 Moisture SonalPandey 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Maxxam ID: AIS100 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -WS -02 Shipped: Moisture Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055844 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055817 N/A 2015/06/15 Kevin Comerford Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS100 Dup Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -WS -02 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055844 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055817 N/A 2015/06/15 Kevin Comerford Maxxam ID: AIS101 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -CC -01 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Automated Statchk Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Page 22 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS102 Sample ID: EXP -CC -02 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Success Through Science Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICPl/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4057040 2015/06/09 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Automated Statchk Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS103 Sample ID: EXP -CC -03 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4057040 2015/06/09 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Automated Statchk Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS103 Dup Sample ID: EXP -CC -03 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/15 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru Maxxam ID: AIS104 Sample ID: REF1-COMP1 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Page 23 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS105 Sample ID: REF1-COMP2 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Success Through Science Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICPl/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Automated Statchk Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS106 Sample ID: REF1-COMP3 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS107 Sample ID: REF1-COMP4 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4057040 2015/06/09 2015/06/18 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Automated Statchk Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS108 Sample ID: REFI -COMPS Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Prar is Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Page 24 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS109 Sample ID: REF1-COMP6 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Success Through Science Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICPl/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/10 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4058023 2015/06/09 2015/06/15 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4084415 2015/06/27 2015/07/03 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 2015/05/28 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS109 Dup Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: REF1-COMP6 Shipped: ICP1/MS Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst 2015/06/11 OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4084415 2015/06/27 2015/07/03 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD Maxxam ID: AIS110 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: REF2-COMP1 Shipped: N/A Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description N/A Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Fe Camitan Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/10 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS111 Sample ID: REF2-COMP2 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS112 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: REF2-YP-01 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Page 25 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS112 Sample ID: REF2-YP-01 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS113 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: REFlYP-01 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 SonalPandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS114 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: REF -I -WB -01 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS114 Dup Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: REF -I -WB -01 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru Maxxam ID: AIS115 Sample ID: EXP -ES -01 Matrix: TISSUE Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey Page 26 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, _SN 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS115 Sample ID: EXP -ES -01 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS116 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -ES -02 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/10 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS117 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -ES -03 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS118 Collected: 2015/05/19 Sample ID: EXP -ES -04 Shipped: Matrix: TISSUE Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/09 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4055888 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Page 27 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 Maxxam ID: AIS119 Sample ID: EXP -ES -05 Matrix: TISSUE Test Description Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Mercury in Tissue by CVAA CV/AA 4055842 N/A 2015/06/10 Magdalena Carlos Metals in Tissue by ICPMS ICP1/MS 4055816 N/A 2015/06/10 Arefa Dabhad Percent Lipid Content 4061206 2015/06/11 2015/06/11 Sonal Pandey OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB in Tissue GC/ECD 4070513 2015/06/17 2015/06/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 4041541 N/A 2015/06/09 Ewa Pranjic Moisture 4056193 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Maxxam ID: AIS119 Dup Sample ID: EXP -ES -05 Matrix: TISSUE Collected: 2015/05/19 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/28 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Moisture 4056193 N/A 2015/06/08 Fe Camitan Page 28 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 GENERAL COMMENTS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt Package 1 2.3°C Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Revised Report (2015/07/06): Maxxam ID# AS1109 was reworked for OC Pesticides. Sample AIS099-01 : OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limits were raised due to matrix interferences. Sample AIS106-01 : OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Sample AIS109-01 : OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Sample AIS117-01 : OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Results relate only to the items tested. Success Through Science Page 29 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencee, Page 30 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4057040 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/06/17 66 30-130 53 30-130 89 % 4057040 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/06/17 87 30-130 82 30-130 124 % 4070513 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/06/24 68 30-130 75 30-130 69 % 4070513 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/06/24 78 30-130 83 30-130 75 % 4084415 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/07/03 60 30-130 67 30-130 53 % 4084415 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/07/03 72 30-130 76 30-130 63 % 4055816 Antimony (Sb) 2015/06/09 100 75-125 103 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Arsenic (As) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 101 80-120 <0.1 ug/g NC 20 95 70-130 4055816 Barium (Ba) 2015/06/09 94 75-125 98 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Beryllium (Be) 2015/06/09 94 75-125 99 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Bismuth (Bi) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 101 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Boron (B) 2015/06/09 93 75-125 99 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Cadmium (Cd) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 102 80-120 <0.01 ug/g NC 20 91 70-130 4055816 Calcium (Ca) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 101 80-120 <50 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Chromium (Cr) 2015/06/09 97 75-125 100 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 85 60-140 4055816 Cobalt (Co) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 101 80-120 <0.005 ug/g NC 20 97 70-130 4055816 Copper (Cu) 2015/06/09 100 75-125 102 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 90 70-130 4055816 Iron (Fe) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 102 80-120 <3 ug/g 6.5 20 87 70-130 4055816 Lead (Pb) 2015/06/09 99 75-125 102 80-120 <0.03 ug/g NC 20 87 70-130 4055816 Magnesium (Mg) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 101 80-120 <100 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Manganese (Mn) 2015/06/09 96 75-125 101 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 87 70-130 4055816 Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/06/09 99 75-125 102 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 96 70-130 4055816 Nickel (Ni) 2015/06/09 100 75-125 104 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 90 60-140 4055816 Phosphorus (P) 2015/06/09 <50 ug/g 2.0 20 4055816 Potassium (K) 2015/06/09 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <100 ug/g 0.61 20 4055816 Selenium (Se) 2015/06/09 99 75-125 103 80-120 <0.1 ug/g 4.2 20 90 70-130 4055816 Silver (Ag) 2015/06/09 97 75-125 101 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Sodium (Na) 2015/06/09 NC 75-125 100 80-120 <50 ug/g 1.1 20 4055816 Strontium (Sr) 2015/06/09 97 75-125 99 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 88 70-130 4055816 Thallium (TI) 2015/06/09 98 75-125 102 80-120 <0.003 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Tin (Sn) 2015/06/09 97 75-125 99 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 Page 30 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencee, Page 31 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4055816 Titanium (Ti) 2015/06/09 96 75-125 100 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Uranium (U) 2015/06/09 <0.005 ug/g NC 20 4055816 Vanadium (V) 2015/06/09 99 75-125 100 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 91 70-130 4055816 Zinc (Zn) 2015/06/09 NC 75-125 102 80-120 <2 ug/g NC 20 92 70 - 130 4055817 Antimony (Sb) 2015/06/15 110 75-125 108 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Arsenic (As) 2015/06/15 103 75-125 105 80-120 <0.1 ug/g NC 20 96 70-130 4055817 Barium (Ba) 2015/06/15 104 75-125 102 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Beryllium (Be) 2015/06/15 102 75-125 101 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Bismuth (Bi) 2015/06/15 105 75-125 103 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Boron (B) 2015/06/15 102 75-125 103 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Cadmium (Cd) 2015/06/15 108 75-125 106 80-120 <0.01 ug/g NC 20 95 70-130 4055817 Calcium (Ca) 2015/06/15 111 75-125 102 80-120 <50 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Chromium (Cr) 2015/06/15 104 75-125 105 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 85 60-140 4055817 Cobalt (Co) 2015/06/15 105 75-125 105 80-120 <0.005 ug/g NC 20 97 70-130 4055817 Copper (Cu) 2015/06/15 108 75-125 106 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 94 70-130 4055817 Iron (Fe) 2015/06/15 105 75-125 105 80-120 <3 ug/9 NC 20 88 70-130 4055817 Lead (Pb) 2015/06/15 106 75-125 104 80-120 <0.03 ug/g NC 20 88 70-130 4055817 Magnesium (Mg) 2015/06/15 105 75-125 103 80-120 <100 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Manganese (Mn) 2015/06/15 107 75-125 107 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 92 70-130 4055817 Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/06/15 108 75-125 105 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 98 70-130 4055817 Nickel (Ni) 2015/06/15 106 75-125 106 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 92 60-140 4055817 Phosphorus (P) 2015/06/15 <50 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Potassium (K) 2015/06/15 NC 75-125 107 80-120 <100 ug/g 0.19 20 4055817 Selenium (Se) 2015/06/15 107 75-125 107 80-120 <0.1 ug/g 4.1 20 93 70-130 4055817 Silver (Ag) 2015/06/15 106 75-125 106 80-120 <0.05 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Sodium (Na) 2015/06/15 NC 75-125 102 80-120 <50 ug/g 0.24 20 4055817 Strontium (Sr) 2015/06/15 105 75-125 104 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 92 70-130 4055817 Thallium (TI) 2015/06/15 104 75-125 103 80-120 <0.003 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Tin (Sn) 2015/06/15 107 75-125 103 80-120 <0.3 ug /g NC 20 4055817 Titanium (Ti) 2015/06/15 103 75-125 104 80-120 <0.5 ug/g NC 20 4055817 Uranium (U) 2015/06/15 <0.005 ug/g NC 20 Page 31 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca IVIa)( am A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT-D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencea, Page 32 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxa m.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4055817 Vanadium (V) 2015/06/15 106 75- 125 105 80-120 <0.3 ug/g NC 20 94 70-130 4055817 Zinc (Zn) 2015/06/15 113 75-125 106 80-120 <2 ug/g NC 20 96 70-130 4055842 Mercury (Hg) 2015/06/10 NC 75-125 <0.005 ug/g 1.9 20 105 70-130 4055844 Mercury (Hg) 2015/06/10 NC 75-125 <0.005 ug/g 1.7 20 99 70-130 4055888 Moisture 2015/06/08 <0.1 g/100g 0.83 20 105 N/A 4056193 Moisture 2015/06/08 <0.1 g/100g 0.42 20 109 N/A 4057040 a -Chlordane 2015/06/18 85 50-130 65 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aldrin 2015/06/18 68 50-130 54 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 alpha -BHC 2015/06/18 70 30-130 62 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1016 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1221 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1232 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1242 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1248 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1254 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1260 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g 18 50 4057040 Aroclor1262 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Aroclor1268 2015/06/18 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 beta -BHC 2015/06/18 94 30-130 82 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 delta -BHC 2015/06/18 100 30-130 99 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Dieldrin 2015/06/18 115 50-130 82 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/06/18 78 50- 130 70 50- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Endosulfan II 2015/06/18 92 50-130 77 50-130 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/06/18 98 30-130 83 30- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Endrin aldehyde 2015/06/18 99 30-130 87 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Endrin 2015/06/18 80 50-130 74 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 g -Chlordane 2015/06/18 89 50-130 73 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/06/18 81 SO- 130 75 50- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Heptachlor 2015/06/18 72 SO- 130 56 50- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/06/18 77 50-130 54 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC N/A 4057040 Lindane 2015/06/18 78 50-130 67 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 Page 32 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxa m.ca IVIa)( am A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B5AO198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT-D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencea, Page 33 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -SN 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxa m.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4057040 Methoxychlor 2015/06/18 99 50-130 78 50-130 <0.08 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Mirex 2015/06/18 83 30-130 72 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 o,p-DDD 2015/06/18 96 50-130 85 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 o,p-DDE 2015/06/18 88 SO -130 74 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 o,p-DDT 2015/06/18 64 50-130 68 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Octachlorostyrene 2015/06/18 80 30- 130 65 30- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 p,p-DDD 2015/06/18 95 50-130 80 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 p,p-DDE 2015/06/18 89 50-130 72 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 p,p-DDT 2015/06/18 82 SO -130 73 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4057040 Toxaphene 2015/06/18 <0.5 ug/g NC 50 4058023 Fat (gravimetric) 2015/06/15 0 % 23 50 4061206 Fat (gravimetric) 2015/06/11 0 % 3.0 50 4070513 a -Chlordane 2015/06/24 77 50-130 78 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aldrin 2015/06/24 64 50-130 76 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 alpha -BHC 2015/06/24 71 30-130 81 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1016 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1221 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1232 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1242 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1248 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1254 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1260 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1262 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Aroclor1268 2015/06/24 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 beta -BHC 2015/06/24 84 30-130 83 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 delta -BHC 2015/06/24 80 30-130 58 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Dieldrin 2015/06/24 80 50-130 71 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/06/24 61 SO- 130 68 50- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Endosulfan II 2015/06/24 74 50-130 28(l) 50-130 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/06/24 80 30- 130 22(l) 30- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Endrin aldehyde 2015/06/24 65 30-130 33 30- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 Page 33 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -SN 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxa m.ca IVIa)( am A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B5AO198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT-D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencea, Page 34 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxa m.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4070513 Endrin 2015/06/24 84 50-130 75 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 g -Chlordane 2015/06/24 73 SO -130 85 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/06/24 60 so- 130 69 50- 130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Heptachlor 2015/06/24 73 50-130 81 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/06/24 68 50-130 76 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC N/A 4070513 Lindane 2015/06/24 68 50-130 85 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Methoxychlor 2015/06/24 105 50-130 58 50-130 <0.08 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Mirex 2015/06/24 79 30-130 87 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 o,p-DDD 2015/06/24 91 SO -130 90 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 o,p-DDE 2015/06/24 76 SO -130 84 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 o,p-DDT 2015/06/24 89 50-130 97 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Octachlorostyrene 2015/06/24 74 30-130 83 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 p,p-DDD 2015/06/24 80 50-130 93 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 p,p-DDE 2015/06/24 65 50-130 87 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 p,p-DDT 2015/06/24 95 50-130 102 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4070513 Toxaphene 2015/06/24 <0.5 ug/g NC 50 4084415 a -Chlordane 2015/07/03 61 50-130 68 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aldrin 2015/07/03 S6 SO -130 65 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 alpha -BHC 2015/07/03 70 30-130 73 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1016 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 408441S Aroclor1221 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1232 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1242 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1248 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1254 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1260 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1262 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Aroclor1268 2015/07/03 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 beta -BHC 2015/07/03 79 30-130 91 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 delta -BHC 2015/07/03 71 30-130 88 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Dieldrin 2015/07/03 78 50-130 74 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 Page 34 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxa m.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •� Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 Report Date: 2015/07/06 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencee, Page 35 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4084415 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/07/03 56 50-130 48 (2) 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Endosulfan II 2015/07/03 61 50-130 62 50-130 <0.03 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/07/03 80 30-130 69 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Endrin aldehyde 2015/07/03 103 30-130 80 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Endrin 2015/07/03 65 50-130 64 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 g -Chlordane 2015/07/03 68 50-130 68 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/07/03 76 50-130 74 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Heptachlor 2015/07/03 69 50-130 72 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/07/03 67 50-130 69 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC N/A 4084415 Lindane 2015/07/03 71 50-130 81 SO -130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Methoxychlor 2015/07/03 118 50-130 103 50-130 <0.08 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Mirex 2015/07/03 64 30-130 60 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 o,p-DDD 2015/07/03 82 50-130 80 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 o,p-DDE 2015/07/03 81 50-130 73 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 o,p-DDT 2015/07/03 63 50-130 71 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 Octachlorostyrene 2015/07/03 75 30-130 71 30-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 p,p-DDD 2015/07/03 75 50-130 76 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 p,p-DDE 2015/07/03 33 (2) 50-130 59 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 4084415 p,p-DDT 2015/07/03 76 50-130 71 50-130 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 Page 35 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma )(�"a m Success Through Sciencee, A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.4- Maxxam Job #: B5A0198 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/06 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Matrix Spike I Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4084415 IToxaphene 2015/07/03 <0.5 ug/g NC 1 50 N/A = Not Applicable Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). (1) The recovery was below the lower control limit. This may represent a low bias in some results for this specific analyte. (2) The recovery for the flagged target analyte was below the control limit as stipulated by Ontario Regulation 153, however, this recovery is still within Maxxam's performance based limits. Results reported for this specific analyte with spike recoveries within this range are still valid but may have an associated low bias. Page 36 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaoam A Bureau Veritas Group Company • Maxxam Job #: 65A0198 Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/06 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Brad Newman, Scientific Specialist Cristina Carriere, Scientific Services Eva Pra tNc9 Ewa Pranjic, M.Sc., tZfiem, Scientific Specialist Helen Weidinger, Scientific Specialist Success Through Science Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 37 of 37 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 MAXXAM JOB #: B545059 Received: 2015/03/13,13:37 Sample Matrix: SEDIMENT # Samples Received: 3 Success Through Sciences Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 505515-03-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3566880 Version: 2R Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Page 1 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Date Date Method Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Hot Water Extractable Boron 3 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00408 R153 Ana. Prot. 2011 Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC (1) 3 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 3060/7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil 3 2015/03/14 2015/03/17 CAM SOP -00315 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil 3 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00316 CCME CWS m Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS 3 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP 3 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00408 EPA 6010C m Moisture 3 N/A 2015/03/17 CAM SOP -00445 Carter 2nd ed 51.2 m OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (2) 3 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 3 N/A 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 3 2015/03/16 2015/03/17 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil 3 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 m Total Organic Carbon in Soil 3 N/A 2015/03/17 CAM SOP -00468 LECO 203-601-224 Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Page 1 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Success Through Science® Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 505515-03-01 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3566880 Version: 2R CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT -2- Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) Soils are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise specified. (2) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (905) 817-5700 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 2 Page 2 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4017 ZW4018 ZW4019 ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units SD15-04 SD15-09 SD15-11 SD15-11 RDL QC Batch Lab -Du Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3950412 Moisture % 23 22 16 17 1.0 3951043 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.18 0.31 0.065 0.063 0.050 3952548 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 120 400 97 50 3951962 Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) ug/g 1800 4300 1600 50 3952105 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 0.21 <0.20 0.20 3952105 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g <1.0 1.9 <1.0 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 9.5 28 8.5 0.50 3952105 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952105 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3952105 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 51000 60000 48000 50 3952105 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 3.6 7.5 4.0 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 1.5 3.3 1.4 0.10 3952105 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 2.9 8.4 2.5 0.50 3952105 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 4100 9400 4700 50 13952105 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 2.3 7.2 2.3 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 3.0 7.0 2.9 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 8700 12000 8100 50 3952105 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 150 310 160 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3952105 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 2.6 6.5 2.8 0.50 3952105 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 400 660 430 50 3952105 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 250 580 240 200 3952105 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3952105 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952105 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 86 110 75 50 3952105 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 61 76 58 1.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 10.050 13952105 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4017 ZW4018 ZW4019 ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units SD15-04 SD15-09 SD15-11 SD15-11 RDL QC Batch Lab -Du Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) ug/g 150 170 150 5.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.20 0.36 0.23 0.050 3952105 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 6.7 13 8.4 5.0 3952105 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 14 30 1 13 1 1 5.0 13952105 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3952105 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 4 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4017 ZW4018 ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units I SD15-04 I SD15-09 I SD15-11 I RDL C Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3949517 Toluene ug/g 0.10 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3949517 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3949517 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3949517 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 10.04 3949517 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3949517 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3949517 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3949517 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3953104 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <50 51 <50 50 3953104 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <50 <50 <50 50 3953104 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g YES YES YES 3953104 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 92 92 94 3949517 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 99 99 98 3949517 D10-Ethylbenzene % 103 117 103 3949517 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 93 91 92 3949517 o-Terphenyl % 88 89 89 3953104 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 5 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciencee Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4017 I ZW4018 I ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units I SD15-04 I SD15-09 I SD15-11 I RDL 1QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0033 0.0058 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 13958157 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0033 0.0058 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958157 Total PCB ug/g <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 0.020 3958157 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 13958373 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0033 0.0058 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 13958373 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 13958373 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.020 (1) <0.020 (1) <0.020 (1) 0.020 3958373 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch ( 1 ) Detection Limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Page 6 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4017 I ZW4018 I ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units I SD15-04 I SD15-09 I SD15-11 I RDL 1QC Batch Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 13958373 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 13958373 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3958373 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 85 89 86 3958373 Decachlorobiphenyl % 69 61 77 3958373 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 7 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID ZW4017 I ZW4018 I ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units I SD15-04 I SD15-09 I SD15-11 I RDL 1QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Anthracene ug/g 0.0092 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.014 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.012 0.0052 <0.0050 0.0050 13950195 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.014 0.0081 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g 0.0081 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0058 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Chrysene ug/g 0.013 0.0058 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.040 0.013 <0.0050 10.0050 3950195 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g 0.0081 0.0058 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.033 0.0052 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Pyrene ug/g 0.031 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3950195 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 99 100 100 3950195 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 80 79 80 3950195 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 89 91 93 3950195 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 8 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Maxxam ID ZW4017 ZW4018 I ZW4019 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 2015/03/12 COC Number 505515-03-01 I 505515-03-01 505515-03-01 Units SD15-04 I SD15-09 I SD15-11 1RDL 1QC Batch Inorganics Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 4700 13000 5500 500 3950778 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 218 409 136 10 3953737 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 9 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID ZW4017 Sample ID SD15-04 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Test Summary Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3952548 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3950412 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Manoj Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3949517 2015/03/14 2015/03/17 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3953104 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Kent Maolin Li Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3952105 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3951962 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Azita Fazaeli Moisture BAL 3951043 N/A 2015/03/17 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3958373 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3958157 N/A 2015/03/25 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3950195 2015/03/16 2015/03/17 Darryl Tiller Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3950778 N/A 2015/03/17 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4018 Sample ID SD15-09 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3952548 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3950412 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3949517 2015/03/14 2015/03/17 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3953104 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Kent Maolin Li Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3952105 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3951962 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Azita Fazaeli Moisture BAL 3951043 N/A 2015/03/17 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3958373 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3958157 N/A 2015/03/25 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3950195 2015/03/16 2015/03/17 Darryl Tiller Total K'eldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Ra'ni T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3950778 N/A 2015/03/17 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4019 Sample ID SD15-11 Matrix SEDIMENT Taco rlace-rinfinn Incfriimonfafinn Rnfrh Frfrarfarl Ona1V7ar1 Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Onalvcf Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3952548 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3950412 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Mano' Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3949517 2015/03/14 2015/03/17 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3953104 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Kent Maolin Li Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3952105 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3951962 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Azita Fazaeli Moisture BAL 3951043 N/A 2015/03/17 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3958373 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3958157 N/A 2015/03/25 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3950195 2015/03/16 2015/03/17 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3950778 N/A 2015/03/17 Birenkumar Patel Page 10 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Test Summary Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID ZW4019 Dup Collected 2015/03/12 Sample ID SD15-11 Shipped Matrix SEDIMENT Received 2015/03/13 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3952548 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Jolly John Moisture BAL 3951043 N/A 2015/03/17 Valentina Kaftani Page 11 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545059 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Package 1 Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt GENERAL COMMENTS Revised Report (07/08/2015): Parameters for metals and OC Pesticides were amended Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Sample ZW4019-01: SAR Analysis: Sodium was not detected. To report SAR the sodium detection limit was used in the calculation. This value represents a maximum ratio. Page 12 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ra M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3949517 LRA Matrix Spike 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/17 91 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/17 99 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/17 110 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/17 91 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/17 83 % 60-140 Toluene 2015/03/17 86 % 60-140 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/17 93 % 60-140 o -Xylene 2015/03/17 99 % 60-140 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/17 90 % 60-140 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/17 74 % 60-140 Spiked Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/17 94 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/17 98 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/17 101 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/17 90 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/17 96 % 60-140 Toluene 2015/03/17 99 % 60-140 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/17 105 % 60-140 o -Xylene 2015/03/17 113 % 60-140 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/17 104 % 60-140 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/17 94 % 80-120 Method Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/17 92 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/17 98 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/17 101 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/17 92 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/17 <0.005 ug/g Toluene 2015/03/17 <0.02 ug/g Ethylbenzene 2015/03/17 <0.01 ug/g o -Xylene 2015/03/17 <0.02 ug/g p+m-Xylene 2015/03/17 <0.04 ug/g Total Xylenes 2015/03/17 <0.04 ug/g F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/17 <10 ug/g F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/17 <10 ug/g RPD Benzene 2015/03/17 NC % 50 Toluene 2015/03/17 NC % 50 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/17 NC % 50 o -Xylene 2015/03/17 NC % 50 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/17 NC % 50 Total Xylenes 2015/03/17 NC % 50 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/17 NC % 50 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/17 NC % 50 3950195 DTI Matrix Spike D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/17 96 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/17 79 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 87 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/17 88 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 90 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/17 93 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/17 97 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/17 91 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 85 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/17 87 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 85 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/17 96 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/17 85 % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/17 96 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/17 85 % 50-130 Page 13 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3950195 DTI Matrix Spike Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/17 99 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 96 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 94 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/17 82 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/17 90 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/17 97 % 50-130 Spiked Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/17 98 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/17 81 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 88 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/17 91 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 91 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/17 95 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/17 99 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/17 92 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 90 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/17 92 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 86 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/17 100 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/17 85 % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/17 94 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/17 88 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/17 105 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 99 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 97 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/17 85 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/17 90 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/17 95 % 50-130 Method Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/17 100 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/17 78 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 86 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Anthracene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Chrysene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Fluoranthene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Fluorene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Naphthalene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Phenanthrene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g Pyrene 2015/03/17 <0.0050 ug/g RPD Acenaphthene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Anthracene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Page 14 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3950195 DTI RPD Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Chrysene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Fluoranthene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Fluorene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Naphthalene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Phenanthrene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 Pyrene 2015/03/17 NC % 40 3950412 MGE Matrix Spike Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 92 % 75-125 QC Standard Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 97 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 <0.2 ug/g RPD Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 NC % 35 3950778 BIP QC Standard Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/17 104 % 75-125 RPD Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/17 NC % 35 Method Blank Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/17 <500 mg/kg 3951043 BOP RPD [ZW4019-01] Moisture 2015/03/17 6.1 % 20 3951962 AFZ Matrix Spike Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/18 106 % 80-120 Method Blank Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g 3952105 VIV Matrix Spike Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/18 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/18 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/18 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/18 96 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/18 99 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/18 98 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/18 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/18 101 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/18 96 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/18 98 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/18 104 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/18 101 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/18 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/18 101 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/18 103 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/18 99 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/18 98 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/18 98 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/18 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/18 104 % 75-125 Page 15 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca MSuccess Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3952105 VIV Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/18 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/18 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/18 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/18 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/18 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/18 99 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/18 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/18 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/18 116 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/18 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/18 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/18 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/18 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/18 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/18 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/18 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/18 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/18 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/18 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/18 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/18 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/18 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/18 106 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/18 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/18 107 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/18 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/18 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/18 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/18 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/18 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/18 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/18 105 % 80-120 Method Blank Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/18 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/18 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/18 <0.10 ug/g Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/18 <0.10 ug/g Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/18 0.58, RDL=0.50 (1) ug/g Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/18 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/18 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/18 <200 ug/g Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/18 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/g Page 16 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3952105 VIV Method Blank Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/18 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/18 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/18 <0.050 ug/g Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/18 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/18 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/18 <0.050 ug/g Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/18 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/18 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/18 <0.050 ug/g RPD Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/18 1.1 % 30 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/18 4.3 % 30 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/18 8.0 % 30 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/18 1.3 % 30 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/18 8.7 % 30 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/18 4.4 % 30 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/18 1.2 % 30 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/18 7.2 % 30 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/18 NC % 30 3952548 JOH Matrix Spike [ZW4019-01] Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/19 100 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/19 103 % 75-125 Method Blank Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/19 <0.050 ug/g RPD [ZW4019-01] Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/19 NC % 40 3953104 KLI Matrix Spike o-Terphenyl 2015/03/19 89 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 90 % 50-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 94 % 50-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 95 % 50-130 Spiked Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/19 87 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 87 % 80-120 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 91 % 80-120 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 91 % 80-120 Method Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/19 91 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 <10 ug/g F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g RPD F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 3953737 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 108 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 102 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 11, RDL=10 ug/g RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 5.9 % 40 3958373 FSO Matrix Spike 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Page 17 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3958373 FSO Matrix Spike Aldrin 2015/03/25 63 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 79 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 98 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 79 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 121 % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 82 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 84 % 50-130 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/25 73 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 71 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 89 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 76 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 60 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 84 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 89 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 93 % 30-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 2.4(2) % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 86 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 128 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 107 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/25 77 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 71 % 30-130 Spiked Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 92 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 110 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 91 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 115 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 92 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 97 % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 78 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 99 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 84 % 50-130 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/25 82 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 89 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 92 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 107 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 82 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 98 % 50-130 RPD Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Spiked Blank alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 86 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 85 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 88 % 30-130 Page 18 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3958373 FSO Spiked Blank Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 72 % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 107 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 121 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 115 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/25 86 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 77 % 30-130 Method Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 97 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Dieldrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Lindane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endosulfan 11 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Heptachlor 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g beta -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g delta -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Mirex 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Toxaphene 2015/03/25 <0.080 ug/g RPD Aldrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Page 19 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545059 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3958373 FSO RPD p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Lindane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endosulfan 11 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 NC (3) % 40 Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 NC % 40 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 NC % 50 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 NC % 50 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Mirex 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Toxaphene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). ( 1 ) Analyte was detected in the method blank at a level marginally above the detection limit. Sample results have not been blank corrected. Those results at or near the detection limit may be biased high. ( 2 ) The recovery was below the lower control limit. This may represent a low bias in some results. (3) Detection Limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Page 20 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: 6545059 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Eva Prrtllfe 4 F C�161t':��r Ewa Pranjic, M. in, Scientific Specialist Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5. 10.2 of ISOJEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 21 of 21 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site#: Small Craft Harbour Your C.O.C. #: 505521-01-01 Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B545209 Received: 2015/03/13,13:55 Sample Matrix: Water # Samples Received: 7 Success Through Sciences Report Date: 2015/07/07 Report #: R3565475 Version: 2R Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is Page 1 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Date Date Method Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Chromium (VI) in Water 1 N/A 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 7199 m Chromium (VI) in Water 6 N/A 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water 7 N/A 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00315 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water 7 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00316 CCME PHC-CWS m Mercury (low level) 7 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00453 EPA 7470 m OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (1) 7 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 1 N/A 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 6 N/A 2015/03/26 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) 7 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270 m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water 1 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 R2.0 m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water 6 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 R2.0 m Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is Page 1 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Success Through Sciencee Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site#: Small Craft Harbour Your C.O.C. #: 505521-01-01 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Report #: R3565475 Version: 2R CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT -2- limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (905) 817-5700 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 2 Page 2 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4481 ZW4482 ZW4483 ZW4484 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/12 14:00 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 3952437 Units SW15-06 SW15-05 SW15-04 SW15-11 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 Toluene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 Ethylbenzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 o -Xylene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 p+m-Xylene ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3952437 Total Xylenes ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3952437 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/L <25 <25 <25 <25 25 3952437 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/L <25 <25 <25 <25 25 3952437 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <100 <100 <100 <100 100 3952517 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 <200 200 3952517 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 <200 200 3952517 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/L YES YES YES YES 3952517 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 108 108 114 109 3952437 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 87 85 73 86 3952437 D10-Ethylbenzene % 83 85 84 83 3952437 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 96 95 100 99 3952437 o-Terphenyl % 87 92 91 91 1 3952517 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4485 ZW4486 ZW4487 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 0.20 Units SWI 5-09 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 Toluene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 Ethylbenzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 o -Xylene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3952437 p+m-Xylene ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3952437 Total Xylenes ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3952437 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/L <25 <25 <25 25 3952437 F 1 (C6 -C 10) - BTEX ug/L <25 <25 <25 25 3952437 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <100 <100 <100 100 3952517 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 200 3952517 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 200 3952517 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/L YES YES YES 13952517 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 114 109 109 3952437 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 89 92 77 3952437 D10-Ethylbenzene % 87 88 84 3952437 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 103 108 105 3952437 o-Terphenyl % 90 90 91 1 13952517 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 4 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El >62 -am A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF WATER Success Through Scienceo Maxxam ID ZW4481 ZW4482 ZW4482 ZW4483 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 Units SWI 5-06 SW15-05 SWI 5-05 Lab -Du SW15-04 RDL QC Batch iorganics otal Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 0.54 0.50 0.50 0.62 0.10 3953731 ;DL = Reportable Detection Limit !C Batch = Quality Control Batch Maxxam ID ZW4484 ZW4485 ZW4486 ZW4487 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 14:00 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 Units SW15-11 SW15-09 FIELD BLANK QC Batch TRIP BLANK RDL QC Batch lorganics otal Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 0.65 0.58 0.13 3953731 1 0.10 0.10 1 3951963 ;DL = Reportable Detection Limit )C Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 5 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4481 ZW4481 ZW4482 ZW4483 ZW4484 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/12 14:00 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 Units SW15-06 SW15-06 Lab -Du SWI 5-05 SW15-04 SW15-11 RDL QC Batch Metals Chromium (VI) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3953801 Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3952103 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Maxxam ID ZW4485 ZW4486 ZW4487 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 Units SW15-09 FIELD BLANK QC Batch TRIP BLANK RDL QC Batch Metals Chromium (VI) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 3953801 <0.50 0.50 3952984 Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.01 <0.01 3952103 <0.01 0.01 3952103 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 6 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 rax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC -MS (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4481 ZW4481 ZW4482 ZW4483 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 3951830 Units SW15-06 SWI 5-06 Lab -Du SW15-05 SWI 5-04 RDL QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Acenaphthylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Chrysene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluorene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Naphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Phenanthrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 104 99 103 97 3951830 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 88 86 89 81 3951830 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 82 79 82 75 1 13951830 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 7 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC -MS (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4484 ZW4485 ZW4486 ZW4487 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 14:00 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 3951830 Units SW15-11 SWI 5-09 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK RDL QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Acenaphthylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Chrysene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluorene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Naphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Phenanthrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 103 99 102 109 3951830 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 88 83 80 87 3951830 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 78 76 82 86 13951830 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 8 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4481 ZW4482 ZW4483 ZW4484 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/12 14:00 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 3955520 Units SW15-06 SWI 5-05 SW15-04 SW15-11 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Chlordane (Total) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 DDT+ Metabolites ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Total Endosulfan ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Total PCB ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 13955520 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 a -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 g -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 o,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 o,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 13956758 o,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Lindane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 3956758 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endosulfan 11 ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 13956758 Endrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Heptachlor ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 0.009 13956758 Hexachloroethane ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3956758 Methoxychlor ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3956758 Aroclor 1016 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 9 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4481 ZW4482 ZW4483 ZW4484 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/12 14:00 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 3956758 Units SW15-06 SWI 5-05 SW15-04 SW15-11 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1221 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1232 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1242 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1248 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1254 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 13956758 Aroclor 1260 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1262 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1268 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 alpha -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 beta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 delta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3956758 Endosulfan sulfate ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endrin aldehyde ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endrin ketone ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Mirex ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Octachlorostyrene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Oxychlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Toxaphene ug/L <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3956758 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 60 80 60 56 3956758 Decachlorobiphenyl % 89 106 88 87 13956758 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 10 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4485 ZW4486 ZW4487 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 0.005 Units SW15-09 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK RDL C Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Chlordane (Total) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 DDT+ Metabolites ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3955520 Total Endosulfan ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 13955520 Total PCB ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3955520 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 a -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 g -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 o,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 o,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 o,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Lindane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 3956758 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endosulfan II ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Heptachlor ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 0.009 3956758 Hexachloroethane ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 13956758 Methoxychlor ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3956758 Aroclor 1016 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 11 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4485 ZW4486 ZW4487 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 505521-01-01 0.05 Units SW15-09 FIELD BLANK TRIP BLANK RDL C Batch Aroclor 1221 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1232 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1242 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1248 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1254 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1260 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1262 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 Aroclor 1268 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956758 alpha -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 beta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 delta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3956758 Endosulfan sulfate ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endrin aldehyde ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Endrin ketone ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Mirex ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Octachlorostyrene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Oxychlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956758 Toxaphene ug/L <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3956758 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 60 59 1 59 13956758 Decachlorobiphenyl % 100 115 108 3956758 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 12 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Maxxam ID ZW4481 Sample ID SW15-06 Matrix Water Test Descrintion Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Test Summary Success Through Science® Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955520 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4481 Dup Sample ID SW15-06 Matrix Water Maxxam ID ZW4482 Sample ID SW15-05 Matrix Water Test Descrintion Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955520 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GUMS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4482 Dup Collected 2015/03/11 Sample ID SW15-05 Shipped Matrix Water Received 2015/03/13 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4483 Sample ID SW15-04 Matrix Water Test Descrintinn Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Instrumentation Ratch Extracted Analvzed Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Mano' Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru Page 13 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Maxxam ID ZW4484 Sample ID SW15-11 Matrix Water Test Descrintion Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Test Summary Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Success Through Sciences Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955520 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4485 Sample ID SW15-09 Matrix Water Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955520 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4486 Sample ID FIELD BLANK Matrix Water Tpst npsrrintinn Instrumpntatinn Rntrh Fxtrnrtpd Analv7pd Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955520 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Page 14 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Maxxam ID ZW4487 Sample ID TRIP BLANK Matrix Water Test Description Test Summary Instrumentation Batch Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Extracted Analyzed Analyst Chromium VI in Water IC 3952984 N/A 2015/03/19 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3952437 N/A 2015/03/18 Geor eta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3952517 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Margaret Kulcz k-Stanko Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956758 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955520 N/A 2015/03/25 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3951963 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Rani T a i Page 15 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: 6545209 Report Date: 2015/07/07 Package 1 -0.3°C Package 2 -1.3°C Package 3 -2.0°C Package 4 -1.7°C Package 5 0.7°C Package 6 -2.0°C Package 7 -1.7oC Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt GENERAL COMMENTS Revised Report (2015/07/07): Metals and OC pesticide parameters revised Page 16 of 23 Success Through Scienceo Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: MB545209 Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3951830 YZ Matrix Spike D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/18 88 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/18 40(l) % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 78 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 83 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 81 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/18 81 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 35 (2) % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 19 (3) % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 20 (3) % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 14 (3) % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 20 (3) % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/18 33 (3) % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 12 (3) % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 66 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/18 84 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 17 (3) % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 90 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 86 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/18 80 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 80 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/18 61 % 50-130 Spiked Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/18 97 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/18 82 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 80 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 87 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 85 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/18 94 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 88 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 87 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 87 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 69 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 87 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/18 95 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 44 (4) % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 94 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/18 86 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 88 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 95 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 91 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/18 84 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 89 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/18 95 % 50-130 Method Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/18 98 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/18 79 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 78 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Anthracene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Chrysene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Page 17 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (505) 817-5700 Toll-l-ree: 800-563-6266 Fax(905) 817-5777 www.maxxarn.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545209 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3951830 YZ Method Blank Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Fluorene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Naphthalene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Pyrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L RPD [ZW4481-03] Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Anthracene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Chrysene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Fluorene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Naphthalene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Pyrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 3951963 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/18 87 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/18 104 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/18 95 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/18 <0.10 mg/L RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/18 0.55 % 20 3952103 RON Matrix Spike [ZW4481-10] Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 94 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 99 % 80-120 Method Blank Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 <0.01 ug/L RPD [ZW4481-10] Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3952437 GRU Matrix Spike 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/18 103 % 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/18 123 % 70-130 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/18 94 % 70-130 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/18 93 % 70-130 Benzene 2015/03/18 109 % 70-130 Toluene 2015/03/18 109 % 70-130 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/18 NC % 70-130 o -Xylene 2015/03/18 117 % 70-130 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/18 107 % 70-130 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/18 92 % 70-130 Spiked Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/18 97 % 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/18 116 % 70-130 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/18 89 % 70-130 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/18 102 % 70-130 Benzene 2015/03/18 98 % 70-130 Toluene 2015/03/18 102 % 70-130 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/18 113 % 70-130 o -Xylene 2015/03/18 113 % 70-130 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/18 104 % 70-130 Page 18 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545209 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3952437 GRU Spiked Blank F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/18 104 % 70-130 Method Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/18 104 % 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/18 103 % 70-130 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/18 78 % 70-130 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/18 110 % 70-130 Benzene 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/L Toluene 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/L Ethylbenzene 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/L o -Xylene 2015/03/18 <0.20 ug/L p+m-Xylene 2015/03/18 <0.40 ug/L Total Xylenes 2015/03/18 <0.40 ug/L F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/18 <25 ug/L F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/18 <25 ug/L RPD Benzene 2015/03/18 5.4 % 30 Toluene 2015/03/18 0.67 % 30 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/18 2.4 % 30 o -Xylene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/18 5.6 % 30 Total Xylenes 2015/03/18 3.8 % 30 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/18 11 % 30 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/18 14 % 30 3952517 MKS Matrix Spike o-Terphenyl 2015/03/19 89 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 102 % 50-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 91 % 50-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 86 % 50-130 Spiked Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/19 89 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 103 % 60-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 93 % 60-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 85 % 60-130 Method Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/19 86 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 <100 ug/L F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 <200 ug/L F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 <200 ug/L RPD F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 3952984 SAC Matrix Spike [ZW4487-05] Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 97 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L RPD Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3953731 RTY Matrix Spike [ZW4482-05] Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 98 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 <0.10 mg/L RPD [ZW4482-05] Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3953801 MGE Matrix Spike [ZW4481-06] Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 109 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 100 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 <0.50 ug/L RPD [ZW4481-06] Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 3956758 FSO Matrix Spike 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/24 43 (5) % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/24 113 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/24 75 % 50-130 Page 19 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545209 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3956758 FSO Matrix Spike Dieldrin 2015/03/24 104 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/24 91 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/24 95 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/24 100 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/24 97 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/24 82 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/24 79 % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/24 84 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/24 87 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/24 83 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/24 72 % 50-130 Endosulfan II 2015/03/24 87 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/24 87 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/24 81 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/24 90 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/24 89 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/24 NC % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/24 NC % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/24 105 % 50-130 alpha -BHC 2015/03/24 83 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/24 81 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/24 77 % 30-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/24 47 % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/24 101 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/24 79 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/24 96 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/24 87 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/24 75 % 30-130 Oxychlordane 2015/03/24 82 % 30-130 Spiked Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/24 43 (5) % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/24 116 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/24 72 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/24 113 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/24 98 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/24 98 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/24 106 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/24 97 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/24 87 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/24 88 % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/24 87 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/24 91 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/24 89 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/24 85 % 50-130 Endosulfan 11 2015/03/24 98 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/24 94 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/24 81 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/24 103 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/24 88 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/24 82 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/24 66 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/24 104 % 50-130 RPD Aroclor 1242 2015/03/24 NC % 30 Spiked Blank alpha -BHC 2015/03/24 90 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/24 85 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/24 81 % 30-130 Page 20 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545209 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3956758 FSO Spiked Blank Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/24 49 % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/24 100 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/24 107 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/24 101 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/24 95 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/24 72 % 30-130 Oxychlordane 2015/03/24 86 % 30-130 RPD Toxaphene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Method Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/24 61 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/24 127 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Dieldrin 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L a -Chlordane 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L g -Chlordane 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L o,p-DDD 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L p,p-DDD 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L o,p-DDE 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L p,p-DDE 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L o,p-DDT 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L p,p-DDT 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Lindane 2015/03/24 <0.003 ug/L Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Endosulfan II 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Endrin 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Heptachlor 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/24 <0.009 ug/L Hexachloroethane 2015/03/24 <0.01 ug/L Methoxychlor 2015/03/24 <0.01 ug/L Aroclor 1016 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1221 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1232 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1242 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1248 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1254 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1260 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1262 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1268 2015/03/24 <0.05 ug/L alpha -BHC 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L beta -BHC 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L delta -BHC 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/24 <0.02 ug/L Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Endrin ketone 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Mirex 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Oxychlordane 2015/03/24 <0.005 ug/L Toxaphene 2015/03/24 <0.2 ug/L RPD Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/24 NC % 30 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Page 21 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ra M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545209 Success Through Science® ked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). ( 1) Surrogate recovery may have been impacted by the amount of sediment that was present in sample. ( 2) The recoveries for the flagged target analytes were below the lower control limits due to the presence of sediment and emulsion during processing. Results reported for the flagged analytes may have an associated low bias. (3) Recovery or RPD for this parameter is outside control limits. The overall quality control for this analysis meets acceptability criteria. ( 4 ) The recovery for the flagged target analyte was below the lower control limit as stipulated by Ontario Regulation 153, however, this recovery is still within Maxxam's performance based lower limits. Results reported for this specific analyte with spike recoveries within this range are still valid but may have an associated low bias. ( 5 ) The surrogate recovery was below the control limit as stipulated by Ontario Regulation 153, however, this recovery is still within Maxxam's performance based limits. Results reported with surrogate recoveries within this range are still valid but may have an associated low bias. Page 22 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: 6545209 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). 04`�k-o, ccs Cristina Carriere, Scientific Services E�V,a 111C qR carr 4' Ewa Pranjic, M. ., m, Scientific Specialist Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISOAEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 23 of 23 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M c—i X�- c� t -Yl A Bureau Veritas Group Company Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545209 Your C.O.C. #: 08404719 Attention: Parnian Baber MAXXAM ANALYTICS CAMPOBELLO 6740 CAMPOBELLO ROAD MISSISSAUGA, ON CANADA L5N 21-8 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B521998 Received: 2015/03/18, 09:00 Sample Matrix: Water # Samples Received: 7 Success Through Science® Report Date: 2015/07/03 Report #: R1989862 Version: 4R Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Tabitha Rudkin, AScT, Burnaby Project Manager Email: TRudkin@maxxam.ca Phone# (604) 638-2639 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 1 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Max— Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 11<5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 1 of 9 Date Date Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Analytical Method Na, K, Ca, Mg, S by CRC ICPMS (total) 5 2015/03/18 2015/03/20 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Na, K, Ca, Mg, S by CRC ICPMS (total) 2 2015/03/18 2015/03/23 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Elements by CRC ICPMS (total) 5 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Elements by CRC ICPMS (total) 2 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Tabitha Rudkin, AScT, Burnaby Project Manager Email: TRudkin@maxxam.ca Phone# (604) 638-2639 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 1 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Max— Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 11<5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 1 of 9 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B521998 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545209 Sampler Initials: NA CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Success Through Science® MaxxamID LX0944 LX0945 LX0946 LX0947 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 14:00 2015/03/11 16:30 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/12 14:00 COC Number 08404719 08404719 08404719 08404719 7841249 UNITS SWI 5-06 ZW4481-07 SW15-05 ZW4482-07 SWI 5-04 ZW4483-07 SW15-11 RDL QC Batch ZW4484-07 Total Metals by ICPMS Total Aluminum (AI) ug/L 129 157 398 411 3.0 7841249 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841249 Total Arsenic (As) ug/L 0.41 0.47 0.51 0.51 0.10 7841249 Total Barium (Ba) ug/L 46.0 44.4 48.7 44.2 1.0 7841249 Total Beryllium (Be) ug/L <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841249 Total Bismuth (Bi) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Boron (B) ug/L <50 <50 <50 <50 50 7841249 Total Cadmium (Cd) ug/L 0.010 0.011 0.016 0.014 0.010 7841249 Total Chromium (Cr) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Cobalt (Co) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841249 Total Copper (Cu) ug/L 1.34 0.99 1.62 2.06 0.50 7841249 Total Iron (Fe) ug/L 298 303 663 637 10 7841249 Total Lead (Pb) ug/L 0.26 0.31 0.50 0.49 0.20 7841249 Total Manganese (Mn) ug/L 45.3 45.1 61.6 58.5 1.0 7841249 Total Molybdenum (Mo) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Nickel (Ni) ug/L <1.0 1.1 <1.0 1.6 1.0 7841249 Total Phosphorus (P) ug/L 20 21 44 40 10 7841249 Total Selenium (Se) ug/L 0.16 0.21 0.15 <0.10 0.10 7841249 Total Silver (Ag) ug/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 0.020 7841249 Total Strontium (Sr) ug/L 320 329 324 298 1.0 7841249 Total Thallium (TI) ug/L <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7841249 Total Tin (Sn) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Titanium (Ti) ug/L <5.0 5.6 11.3 15.0 5.0 7841249 Total Uranium (U) ug/L 0.79 0.84 0.76 0.73 0.10 7841249 Total Vanadium (V) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Zinc (Zn) ug/L <5.0 30.1 <5.0 5.7 5.0 7841249 Total Calcium (Ca) mg/L 89.2 90.9 88.0 84.4 0.050 7839576 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 17.3 18.0 16.3 16.0 0.050 7839576 Total Potassium (K) mg/L 2.44 2.57 2.54 2.53 0.050 7839576 Total Sodium (Na) mg/L 47.8 43.2 58.7 37.4 0.050 7839576 Total Sulphur (S) mg/L 14.6 9.7 9.0 11.6 3.0 7839576 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 2 of 9 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B521998 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545209 Sampler Initials: NA CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID LX0948 LX0949 LX0950 Sampling Date 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 16:15 2015/03/12 COC Number 08404719 08404719 08404719 <3.0 UNITS SW15-09 ZW4485-07 QC Batch FIELD BLANK ZW4486-07 TRIP BLANK RDL QC Batch ZW4487-07 Total Metals by ICPMS Total Aluminum (Al) ug/L 570 7841249 <3.0 <3.0 3.0 7841835 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 7841249 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841835 Total Arsenic (As) ug/L 0.53 7841249 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841835 Total Barium (Ba) ug/L 49.3 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841835 Total Beryllium (Be) ug/L <0.10 7841249 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841835 Total Bismuth (Bi) ug/L <1.0 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841835 Total Boron (B) ug/L <50 7841249 <50 <50 50 7841835 Total Cadmium (Cd) ug/L 0.011 7841249 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 7841835 Total Chromium (Cr) ug/L <1.0 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 17841835 Total Cobalt (Co) ug/L <0.50 7841249 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841835 Total Copper (Cu) ug/L 1.66 7841249 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841835 Total Iron (Fe) ug/L 762 7841249 <10 <10 10 7841835 Total Lead (Pb) ug/L 0.57 7841249 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 7841835 Total Manganese (Mn) ug/L 62.4 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 17841835 Total Molybdenum (Mo) ug/L <1.0 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841835 Total Nickel (Ni) ug/L 1.3 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841835 Total Phosphorus (P) ug/L 45 7841249 <10 <10 10 7841835 Total Selenium (Se) ug/L 0.18 7841249 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841835 Total Silver (Ag) ug/L <0.020 7841249 0.031 <0.020 0.020 7841835 Total Strontium (Sr) ug/L 304 7841249 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841835 Total Thallium (TI) ug/L <0.050 7841249 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7841835 Total Tin (Sn) ug/L <5.0 7841249 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841835 Total Titanium (Ti) ug/L 42.7 7841249 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 17841835 Total Uranium (U) ug/L 0.77 7841249 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841835 Total Vanadium (V) ug/L <5.0 7841249 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841835 Total Zinc (Zn) ug/L <5.0 7841249 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841835 Total Calcium (Ca) mg/L 88.1 7839576 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7839576 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 16.6 7839576 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7839576 Total Potassium (K) I mg/L 1 2.77 17839576 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7839576 Total Sodium (Na) mg/L 39.9 7839576 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7839576 Total Sulphur (S) mg/L 11.2 7839576 1 <3.0 <3.0 3.0 7839576 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 3 of 9 A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B521998 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545209 Sampler Initials: NA Package 1 Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt General Comments Results relate only to the items tested. Page 4 of 9 Success Through Scienceo MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: VB521998 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: Parnian Baber Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: Site Location: MB545209 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7841249 AD5 Matrix Spike Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 113 % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 116 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 128(l) % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 90 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 109 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 99 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 97 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 95 % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 <3.0 ug/L Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Boron (B) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/L Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 5 of 9 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: Parnian Baber Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: Site Location: MB545209 Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: VB521998 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7841249 AD5 Method Blank Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 <0.010 ug/L Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 <10 ug/L Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/L Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/19 <10 ug/L Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 0.020, RDL=0.020 ug/L Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 <0.050 ug/L Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L 7841835 AD5 Matrix Spike Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/20 NC % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/20 105 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/20 101 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/20 101 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/20 102 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/20 102 % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/20 102 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/20 102 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/20 NC % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/20 95 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/20 103 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/20 95 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/20 117 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/20 109 % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/20 103 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/20 101 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/20 92 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/20 99 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/20 95 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/20 108 % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 6 of 9 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: Parnian Baber Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: Site Location: MB545209 Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: VB521998 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7841835 AD5 Spiked Blank Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/20 99 % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/20 101 % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/20 98 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/20 100 % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/20 95 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/20 108 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/20 <3.0 ug/L Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/20 <0.50 ug/L Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/20 <0.10 ug/L Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/20 <0.10 ug/L Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Boron (B) 2015/03/20 <50 ug/L Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/20 <0.010 ug/L Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/20 <0.50 ug/L Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/20 <0.50 ug/L Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/20 <10 ug/L Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/20 <0.20 ug/L Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/20 <10 ug/L Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/20 <0.10 ug/L Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/20 <0.020 ug/L Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/20 <1.0 ug/L Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/20 <0.050 ug/L Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/20 <5.0 ug/L Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/20 <5.0 ug/L Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/20 <0.10 ug/L Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/20 <5.0 ug/L Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/20 <5.0 ug/L RPD Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/20 0.34 % 20 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Boron (B) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 7 of 9 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: Parnian Baber Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: Site Location: MB545209 Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: VB521998 Success Through Science® QA/QC Date Batch Analyzed Num Init QC Type Parameter /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7841835 AD5 RPD Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/20 1.5 % 20 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Total Zinc Zn 2015/03/20 NC % 20 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). ( 1 ) Recovery or RPD for this parameter is outside control limits. The overall quality control for this analysis meets acceptability criteria. Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 8 of 9 M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: 6521998 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). David Huang, Scientific Specialist Rob Reiner[; Data Vali ation Coordinator Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 9 of 9 Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 MAXXAM JOB #: B545246 Received: 2015/03/13,16:35 Sample Matrix: SEDIMENT # Samples Received: 8 Success Through Sciences Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 505515-02-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3567082 Version: 2R Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this Page 1 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Date Date Method Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Methylnaphthalene Sum 1 N/A 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00301 EPA 8270D m Hot Water Extractable Boron 7 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00408 R153 Ana. Prot. 2011 Hot Water Extractable Boron 1 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00408 R153 Ana. Prot. 2011 Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC (1) 7 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 3060/7199 m Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC (1) 1 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 3060/7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil 7 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00315 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil 1 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00315 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil 7 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00316 CCME CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil 1 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00316 CCME CWS m Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS 7 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS 1 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP 7 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00408 EPA 6010C m Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP 1 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00408 EPA 6010C m Moisture 4 N/A 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00445 Carter 2nd ed 51.2 m Moisture 3 N/A 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00445 Carter 2nd ed 51.2 m Moisture 1 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00445 Carter 2nd ed 51.2 m OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (2) 7 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (2) 1 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 7 N/A 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 1 N/A 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 7 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 1 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil 7 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil 1 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 m Total Organic Carbon in Soil 7 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00468 LECO 203-601-224 Total Organic Carbon in Soil 1 N/A 2015/03/27 CAM SOP -00468 LECO 203-601-224 Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this Page 1 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Success Through Science® Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 505515-02-01 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3567082 Version: 2R CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT -2- analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) Soils are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise specified. (2) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (905) 817-5700 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 2 Page 2 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 3953470 Units SD15-03 SD15-03 Lab -Du SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3953470 Moisture % 20 20 17 17 1.0 3954118 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g <0.050 0.082 0.12 0.050 3953817 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 200 170 <50 50 3954707 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 1400 1400 2000 2900 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3953834 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g <1.0 1.1 <1.0 1.2 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 6.9 6.8 11 16 0.50 13953834 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3953834 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3953834 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 49000 55000 52000 60000 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 2.6 2.8 4.3 6.1 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 1.4 1.4 1.8 2.5 0.10 3953834 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 2.2 2.0 3.2 5.4 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 3500 3600 5600 7000 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 2.6 2.5 2.7 3.8 1.0 13953834 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 2.9 3.1 3.5 5.0 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 6300 7200 9500 11000 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 140 150 190 250 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 3.1 3.1 3.5 4.8 0.50 13953834 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 240 280 430 520 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 230 230 290 430 200 3953834 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3953834 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 70 75 81 1100 1 50 13953834 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 64 69 64 76 1.0 3953834 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 3953834 Units SD15-03 SD15-03 Lab -Du SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3953834 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) ug/g 94 82 160 170 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.16 0.17 0.22 0.27 0.050 3953834 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 5.2 5.2 9.5 11 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 13 11 15 23 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3953834 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 4 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4603 ZW4604 ZW4605 ZW4606 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 3953470 Units QGSD-15-02 Lab -Du QC Batch SD15-07 SD15-01 SD15-08 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 3953470 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3953470 Moisture % 3954118 26 31 36 1.0 3952592 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 3953817 0.24 0.27 0.33 0.050 3953817 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 3954707 490 560 690 50 3954707 Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) ug/g 3953834 6900 7800 9600 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g 3953834 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3953834 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 3953834 2.2 2.4 3.4 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 3953834 40 45 57 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g 3953834 0.32 0.38 0.45 0.20 3953834 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g 3953834 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g 3953834 7.3 6.4 7.3 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g 3953834 0.13 0.14 0.16 0.10 3953834 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 3953834 66000 67000 69000 50 13953834 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 3953834 12 12 15 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 3953834 5.0 5.7 6.8 0.10 3953834 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 3953834 13 14 18 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 3953834 14000 15000 18000 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 3953834 7.8 8.8 11 1.0 13953834 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 3953834 10 12 14 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 3953834 14000 14000 15000 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 3953834 470 520 630 1.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g 3953834 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 3953834 10 12 15 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 3953834 750 780 830 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 1 3953834 1000 1100 1400 200 3953834 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g 3953834 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3953834 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g 3953834 <0.20 1 <0.20 1 <0.20 10.20 13953834 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 3953834 150 160 1 160 1 50 3953834 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 3953834 89 92 98 1.0 3953834 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 5 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4603 ZW4604 ZW4605 ZW4606 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 3953834 Units QGSD-15-02 Lab -Du QC Batch SD15-07 SD15-01 SD15-08 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g 3953834 0.067 0.075 0.11 0.050 3953834 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g 3953834 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) ug/g 3953834 210 220 230 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 3953834 0.37 0.41 0.44 0.050 3953834 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 3953834 1 19 1 19 23 5.0 3953834 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 4ug/g 3953834 1 44 1 48 62 5.0 3953834 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 6 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4607 ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 1 1 1505515-02-01 Units I SD15-06 I RDL JQC Batch I SD15-05 I RDL JQC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 0.2 3953470 <0.2 0.2 3958424 Moisture % 21 1.0 3952592 22 1.0 3957448 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.17 0.050 3953817 0.27 0.050 3958670 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 1 220 50 13954707 <500 500 13959476 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 3300 50 3953834 3400 50 3959586 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3953834 <0.20 0.20 3959586 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.2 1.0 3953834 1.2 1.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 19 0.50 3953834 19 0.50 3959586 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3953834 <0.20 0.20 3959586 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 1.0 13953834 <1.0 1.0 13959586 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 5.0 3953834 <5.0 5.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 0.10 3953834 <0.10 0.10 3959586 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 58000 50 3953834 58000 50 3959586 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 6.7 1.0 3953834 6.4 1.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 2.6 0.10 3953834 2.7 0.10 3959586 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 6.1 0.50 3953834 6.1 0.50 3959586 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 8200 50 3953834 7800 50 3959586 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 4.0 1.0 3953834 4.0 1.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 5.1 1.0 3953834 4.7 1.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 12000 50 3953834 10000 50 13959586 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 270 1.0 3953834 270 1.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 0.50 3953834 <0.50 0.50 3959586 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 4.9 0.50 3953834 5.2 0.50 3959586 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 680 50 13953834 600 50 3959586 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 510 200 3953834 460 200 3959586 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 0.50 3953834 <0.50 0.50 3959586 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3953834 <0.20 0.20 3959586 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 120 50 3953834 99 50 3959586 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 72 1.0 13953834 1 72 1.0 13959586 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 0.050 33834 <0.050 0.050 3959586 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 5.0 395395834 1 <5.0 1 5.0 3959586 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 7 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4607 ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 1 1 1505515-02-01 Units I SD15-06 I RDL JQC Batch I SD15-05 I RDL JQC Batch Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) ug/g 190 5.0 3953834 180 5.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.28 0.050 3953834 0.29 0.050 3959586 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 13 5.0 3953834 11 5.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 29 5.0 3953834 24 5.0 3959586 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 0.050 3953834 <0.050 0.050 3959586 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 8 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 ZW4604 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 Toluene Units SD15-03 SD15-03 Lab -Du SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 SD15-07 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3953671 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3953671 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3953671 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3953671 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3953671 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3953671 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3953671 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3953671 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954027 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <50 <50 <50 <50 50 3954027 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <50 <50 <50 <50 50 3954027 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g YES YES YES YES 3954027 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 100 101 101 100 101 3953671 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 102 100 100 101 100 3953671 D10-Ethylbenzene % 95 96 115 99 106 3953671 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 100 99 101 100 102 3953671 o-Terphenyl % 94 90 94 98 3954027 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 9 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZW4605 ZW4606 ZW4607 ZW4608 ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 0.005 Units SD15-01 SD15-08 SD15-06 QC Batch SD15-05 SD15-05 RDL QC Batch Lab -Du BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 3953671 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959036 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 3953671 0.03 0.03 0.02 3959036 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 3953671 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3959036 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 3953671 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3959036 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 3953671 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3959036 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 3953671 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3959036 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 <10 3953671 <10 <10 10 3959036 F1 (C6 -C1 0) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 <10 3953671 <10 <10 10 3959036 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (CIO -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 3954027 <10 10 3959295 F3(C16-C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <50 54 <50 3954027 <50 50 3959295 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <50 <50 <50 3954027 <50 50 3959295 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g YES YES YES 3954027 YES 3959295 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 100 100 100 3953671 97 101 3959036 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 101 100 101 3953671 97 106 3959036 D10-Ethylbenzene % 102 105 1 105 13953671 1 135 139 13959036 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 102 103 103 3953671 1 98 104 3959036 o-Terphenyl % 97 98 92 3954027 1 87 1 3959295 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 10 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M .El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 ZW4604 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 <0.0020 Units SD15-03 SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 SD15-07 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0037 0.0020 3955297 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0037 0.0020 3955297 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955297 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0037 0.0020 3956701 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Aroclor1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit OC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 11 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M .El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 ZW4604 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 3956701 Units SD15-03 SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 SD15-07 RDL QC Batch Aroclor1221 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1242 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3956701 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3956701 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 73 78 73 81 3956701 Decachlorobiphenyl % 110 110 100 84 3956701 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 12 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4605 ZW4606 ZW4607 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 <0.0030 Units SD15-01 SD15-08 RDL SD15-06 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0065 0.014 0.0030 0.0022 0.0020 3955297 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0065 0.0092 0.0030 0.0022 0.0020 3955297 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0030 0.0044 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955297 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 10.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 13955297 Total PCB ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3955297 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 13956701 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0065 0.0092 10.0030 0.0022 0.0020 3956701 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 13956701 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0030 0.0044 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Lindane ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 13956701 Endrin ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 10.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0075 <0.0075 0.0075 <0.0050 0.0050 13956701 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0075 <0.0075 0.0075 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0075 <0.0075 0.0075 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Aroclor1016 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 13 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4605 ZW4606 ZW4607 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 0.023 Units SD15-01 SD15-08 RDL SD15-06 RDL QC Batch Aroclor1221 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1232 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1242 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1248 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1254 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1260 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1262 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 Aroclor1268 ug/g <0.023 <0.023 0.023 <0.015 0.015 3956701 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0075 <0.0075 0.0075 <0.0050 0.0050 3956701 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 10.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Mirex ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3956701 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0030 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 10.0020 3956701 Toxaphene ug/g <0.12 <0.12 0.12 <0.080 0.080 3956701 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 84 86 82 3956701 Decachlorobiphenyl % 102 111 1 98 13956701 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 14 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4608 ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 Units SD15-05 SD15-05 RDL QC Batch Lab -Du Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3956843 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3956843 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0029 0.0020 3956843 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3956843 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3956843 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0029 0.0020 3956843 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3956843 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3956843 Total PCB ug/g <0.020 0.020 3956843 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0029 0.0026 0.0020 3958373 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 13958373 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 15 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZW4608 ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 Units SD15-05 SD15-05 RDL QC Batch Lab -Du Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.020 (1) <0.020 (1) 0.020 3958373 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3958373 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 13958373 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3958373 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3958373 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3958373 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 82 92 3958373 Decachlorobiphenyl % 74 77 13958373 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch ( 1 ) Detection Limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Page 16 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 ZW4604 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 <0.0050 Units SD15-03 SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 SD15-07 RDL QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0068 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.017 0.0075 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.015 0.0081 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.020 0.015 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0085 0.0075 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0074 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.016 0.0081 0.0050 3952710 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0062 0.055 0.019 0.0050 3952710 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0091 0.0069 0.0050 3952710 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Phenanthrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.026 0.0075 0.0050 3952710 Pyrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 0.041 0.015 0.0050 3952710 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 107 105 106 104 3952710 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 86 87 88 88 3952710 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 81 81 81 82 3952710 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 17 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID ZW4605 ZW4606 ZW4607 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 0.0050 Units SD15-01 RDL SD15-08 RDL SD15-06 RDL QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.010 0.0050 0.014 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.012 0.0050 0.016 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.021 0.0050 0.027 0.010 0.0059 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g 0.0096 0.0050 0.014 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0071 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 13952710 Chrysene ug/g 0.011 0.0050 0.014 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.029 0.0050 0.033 0.010 0.0081 0.0050 3952710 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g 0.0090 0.0050 0.013 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.010 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.011 0.0050 0.012 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3952710 Pyrene ug/g 0.022 0.0050 0.028 0.010 0.0065 0.0050 3952710 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 103 107 108 3952710 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 88 94 89 3952710 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 81 88 84 3952710 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 18 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciencee Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Maxxam ID I ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 Units I SD15-05 I RDL 1QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 0.0071 3956850 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.0060 0.0050 3957767 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.0054 0.0050 3957767 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0090 0.0050 3957767 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 13957767 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Chrysene ug/g 0.0054 0.0050 3957767 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.014 0.0050 3957767 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 13957767 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g 0.0066 0.0050 3957767 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3957767 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.0060 0.0050 3957767 Pyrene ug/g 0.011 0.0050 3957767 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 87 3957767 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 78 3957767 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 81 3957767 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 19 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Maxxam ID ZW4601 ZW4601 ZW4602 ZW4603 ZW4604 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/09 14:00 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 11:45 2015/03/10 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 SD15-06 Units SD15-03 SD15-03 Lab -Du SD15-02 QGSD-15-02 SD15-07 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 2000 1900 2200 3800 10000 500 3953794 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 66 103 184 502 10 3953737 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Maxxam ID ZW4605 ZW4606 ZW4607 ZW4608 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 11:00 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 505515-02-01 Units SD15-01 SD15-08 SD15-06 QC Batch SD15-05 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 12000 14000 4300 3953794 4700 500 3962720 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 391 961 200 3953737 448 10 3959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 20 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID ZW4601 Sample ID SD15-03 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Success Through Sciencee Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Test Summary Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/09 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Manoj Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3954118 N/A 2015/03/19 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4601 Dup Sample ID SD15-03 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/09 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Moisture BAL 3954118 N/A 2015/03/19 Valentina Kaftani Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4602 Sample ID SD15-02 Matrix SEDIMENT Test necrrintinn Instrumentation Ratch Fxtrartpd Analyzed Collected 2015/03/10 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Manoj Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3954118 N/A 2015/03/19 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Page 21 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID ZW4603 Sample ID QGSD-15-02 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Test Summary Collected 2015/03/10 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Mano Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3954118 N/A 2015/03/19 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4603 Dup Collected 2015/03/10 Sample ID QGSD-15-02 Shipped Matrix SEDIMENT Received 2015/03/13 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Mano' Gera Maxxam ID ZW4604 Sample ID SD15-07 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintinn Instrumentation Batch Extracted AnalVzed Collected 2015/03/10 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Mano' Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3952592 N/A 2015/03/18 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4605 Sample ID SD15-01 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Mano Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3952592 N/A 2015/03/18 Valentina Kaftani Page 22 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Test Summary Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4606 Sample ID SD15-08 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintinn Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Mano' Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3952592 N/A 2015/03/18 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GUMS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4607 Sample ID SD15-06 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3953817 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3953470 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Mano' Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3953671 2015/03/17 2015/03/19 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954027 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3953834 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3954707 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Suban Kanapathippllai Moisture BAL 3952592 N/A 2015/03/18 Valentina Kaftani OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3956701 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3955297 N/A 2015/03/20 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3952710 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3953737 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3953794 N/A 2015/03/23 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4608 Sample ID SD15-05 Matrix SEDIMENT Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Methyl nahthalene Sum CALC 3956850 N/A 2015/03/25 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958424 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3959036 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Lincoln Ramdahin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3959295 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Zhi ue Frank Zhu tronq Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3959586 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill Moisture BAL 3957448 N/A 2015/03/23 Valentina Kaftani Page 23 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Test Summary Success Through Scienceo Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3958373 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956843 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3957767 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rani T a i Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID ZW4608 Dup Sample ID SD15-05 Matrix SEDIMENT Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hvdro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3959036 2015/03/23 2015/03/25 Lincoln Ramdahin naz Somwaru Page 24 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545246 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Package 1 Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt GENERAL COMMENTS Revised Report (07/08/2015): Parameters for metals and OC Pesticides were amended Sample ZW4601-01: SAR Analysis: Sodium was not detected. To report SAR the sodium detection limit was used in the calculation. This value represents a maximum ratio. Sample ZW4602-01: SAR Analysis: Sodium was not detected. To report SAR the sodium detection limit was used in the calculation. This value represents a maximum ratio. Sample ZW4603-01: SAR Analysis: Sodium was not detected. To report SAR the sodium detection limit was used in the calculation. This value represents a maximum ratio. Sample ZW4605-01: OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limits were adjusted for high moisture content. Sample ZW4606-01: PAH Analysis: Detection limits were adjusted for high moisture content. OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limits were adjusted for high moisture content. Sample ZW4608-01: Metals Analysis: Due to the sample matrix, sample required dilution. Detection limits were adjusted accordingly. Results relate only to the items tested. Page 25 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3952592 BOP RPD Moisture 2015/03/18 2.5 % 20 3952710 DTI Matrix Spike D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/19 91 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/19 83 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 75 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/19 83 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 80 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/19 91 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/19 103 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/19 100 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 89 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/19 90 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 98 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/19 97 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/19 88 % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/19 105 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/19 83 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/19 101 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 90 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 86 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/19 78 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/19 93 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/19 101 % 50-130 Spiked Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/19 101 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/19 85 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 77 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/19 85 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 81 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/19 93 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/19 86 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/19 91 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 94 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/19 88 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 87 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/19 94 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/19 73 % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/19 92 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/19 83 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/19 102 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 93 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 89 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/19 82 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/19 85 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/19 94 % 50-130 Method Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/19 104 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/19 82 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 79 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Anthracene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Chrysene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Page 26 of 42 Maxxarn Analytics International Gorporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mlssissauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (505) 817-5700 Toll-l-ree: 800-563-6266 Fax (905) 817-5777 wvvw.maxxarn.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3952710 DTI Method Blank Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Fluoranthene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Fluorene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Naphthalene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Phenanthrene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g Pyrene 2015/03/19 <0.0050 ug/g RPD Acenaphthene 2015/03/19 11 % 40 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/19 7.8 % 40 Anthracene 2015/03/19 15 % 40 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/19 7.8 % 40 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/19 9.0 % 40 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 7.4 % 40 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/19 8.6 % 40 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/19 8.6 % 40 Chrysene 2015/03/19 8.8 % 40 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/19 27 % 40 Fluoranthene 2015/03/19 9.7 % 40 Fluorene 2015/03/19 13 % 40 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/19 8.6 % 40 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 NC % 40 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/19 NC % 40 Naphthalene 2015/03/19 NC % 40 Phenanthrene 2015/03/19 12 % 40 Pyrene 2015/03/19 8.4 % 40 3953470 MGE Matrix Spike [ZW4603-01] Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 69(l) % 75-125 QC Standard Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 111 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 99 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 <0.2 ug/g RPD [ZW4603-01] Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 NC % 35 3953671 LRA Matrix Spike [ZW4601-03] 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/19 100 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/19 101 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/19 101 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/19 99 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/19 91 % 60-140 Toluene 2015/03/19 90 % 60-140 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 102 % 60-140 o -Xylene 2015/03/19 99 % 60-140 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 91 % 60-140 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 76 % 60-140 Spiked Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/19 101 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/19 100 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/19 102 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/19 99 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/19 108 % 60-140 Toluene 2015/03/19 106 % 60-140 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 119 % 60-140 o -Xylene 2015/03/19 114 % 60-140 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 106 % 60-140 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 98 % 80-120 Method Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/19 101 % 60-140 Page 27 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3953671 LRA Method Blank 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/19 101 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/19 105 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/19 101 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/19 <0.005 ug/g Toluene 2015/03/19 <0.02 ug/g Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 <0.01 ug/g o -Xylene 2015/03/19 <0.02 ug/g p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 <0.04 ug/g Total Xylenes 2015/03/19 <0.04 ug/g F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 <10 ug/g F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/19 <10 ug/g RPD [ZW4601-03] Benzene 2015/03/19 NC % 50 Toluene 2015/03/19 NC % 50 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 NC % 50 o -Xylene 2015/03/19 NC % 50 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 NC % 50 Total Xylenes 2015/03/19 NC % 50 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 NC % 50 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/19 NC % 50 3953737 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 108 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 97 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 102 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 11, RDL=10 ug/g RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/20 5.9 % 40 3953794 BIP QC Standard Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/23 100 % 75-125 Method Blank Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/23 <500 mg/kg RPD [ZW4601-01] Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/23 NC % 35 3953817 JOH Matrix Spike Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/20 93 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/20 102 % 75-125 Method Blank Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/20 <0.050 ug/g RPD Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/20 NC % 40 3953834 GBU Matrix Spike [ZW4601-01] Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 101 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 96 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 103 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 96 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/19 103 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 103 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 98 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 97 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/19 104 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 101 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 99 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/19 126 (2) % 75-125 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 101 % 75-125 Page 28 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M-Ell -a r'1"] Success Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3953834 GBU Matrix Spike [ZW4601-01] Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/19 107 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 99 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 90 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 98 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 107 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/19 106 %b 80-120 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 95 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 109 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 93 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Method Blank Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/g Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/g Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g Page 29 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M-Ell -a M Success Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3953834 GBU Method Blank Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/19 <200 ug/g Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 <0.050 ug/g Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 <0.050 ug/g Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 <0.050 ug/g RPD [ZW4601-01] Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/19 0.90 % 30 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 1.8 % 30 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/19 10 % 30 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 0.028 % 30 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 NC %b 30 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 1.9 % 30 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/19 14 % 30 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 7.0 % 30 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 1.9 % 30 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 8.5 % 30 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 14 % 30 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 3954027 ZZ Matrix Spike o-Terphenyl 2015/03/20 91 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 89 % 50-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 91 % 50-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 95 % 50-130 Page 30 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3954027 ZZ Spiked Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/20 94 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 91 % 80-120 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 95 % 80-120 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 96 % 80-120 Method Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/20 95 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 <10 ug/g F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 <50 ug/g F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 <50 ug/g RPD F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 NC % 30 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 NC % 30 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 NC % 30 3954118 BOP RPD [ZW4601-01] Moisture 2015/03/19 1.5 % 20 3954707 SUK Matrix Spike Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/20 NC % 75-125 Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/20 105 % 80-120 Method Blank Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/20 <50 ug/g 3956701 FSO Matrix Spike 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 104 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 95 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 96 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 79 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 78 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 125 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 NC % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 84 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 87 % 50-130 Endosulfan 11 2015/03/25 86 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/25 87 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 93 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 71 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 96 % 50-130 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 70 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 87 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 58 % 30-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 42 % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 84 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 52 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 102 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/25 93 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 76 % 30-130 Spiked Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 78 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 108 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 86 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 79 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 76 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Page 31 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M-Ell -a M Success Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3956701 FSO Spiked Blank o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 84 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 89 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 69 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/25 68 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 76 % 50-130 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 72 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/25 69 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 74 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 71 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 93 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 100 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 94 % 50-130 RPD Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Spiked Blank alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 70 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 75 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 60 % 30-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 73 % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 78 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 70 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 83 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/25 99 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 76 % 30-130 Method Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 74 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 101 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Dieldrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Lindane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Heptachlor 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Page 32 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3956701 FSO Method Blank beta -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g delta -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Mirex 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Toxaphene 2015/03/25 <0.080 ug/g RPD Aldrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 3.7 % 40 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 0.65 % 40 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Lindane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 NC % 40 3957448 BOP RPD Moisture 2015/03/23 1.5 % 20 3957767 DTI Matrix Spike D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/24 89 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/24 79 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/24 84 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/24 85 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/24 82 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/24 82 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/24 93 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/24 88 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/24 91 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/24 73 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/24 86 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/24 92 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/24 69 % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/24 91 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/24 82 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/24 86 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/24 88 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/24 90 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/24 81 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/24 84 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/24 95 % 50-130 Spiked Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/23 89 % 50-130 Page 33 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3957767 DTI Spiked Blank D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/23 77 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/23 84 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/23 88 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/23 83 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/23 85 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/23 90 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/23 90 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/23 94 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/23 73 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/23 91 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/23 93 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/23 64 % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/23 93 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/23 84 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/23 86 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/23 92 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/23 89 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/23 84 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/23 86 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/23 96 % 50-130 Method Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/23 87 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/23 74 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/23 81 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Acenaphthylene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Anthracene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Chrysene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Fluoranthene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Fluorene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Naphthalene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Phenanthrene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g Pyrene 2015/03/23 <0.0050 ug/g RPD Acenaphthene 2015/03/24 26 % 40 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Anthracene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Chrysene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Fluoranthene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Fluorene 2015/03/24 22 % 40 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/24 NC (3) % 40 Page 34 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M-Ell -a M Success Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3957767 DTI RPD 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 Naphthalene 2015/03/24 NC (3) % 40 Phenanthrene 2015/03/24 34 % 40 Pyrene 2015/03/24 NC % 40 3958373 FSO Matrix Spike [ZW4608-01] 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 63 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 79 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 98 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 79 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 121 % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 82 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 84 % 50-130 Endosulfan 11 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/25 73 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 71 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 89 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 76 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 60 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 84 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 89 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 93 % 30-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 2.4(4) % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 86 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 128 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 107 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/25 77 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 71 % 30-130 Spiked Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 92 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 110 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 77 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 91 % 50-130 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 115 % 50-130 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 92 % 50-130 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 83 % 50-130 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 97 % 50-130 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 75 % 50-130 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 78 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 99 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 84 % 50-130 Endosulfan 11 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/03/25 82 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 80 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 89 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 92 % 50-130 Page 35 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3958373 FSO Spiked Blank Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 107 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 82 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 98 % 50-130 RPD Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Spiked Blank alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 86 % 30-130 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 85 % 30-130 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 88 % 30-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 72 % 30-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 107 % 30-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 121 % 30-130 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 115 % 30-130 Mirex 2015/03/25 86 % 30-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 77 % 30-130 Method Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 88 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 97 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Dieldrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Lindane 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Heptachlor 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g beta -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g delta -BHC 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 <0.0050 ug/g Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Mirex 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 <0.0020 ug/g Toxaphene 2015/03/25 <0.080 ug/g RPD [ZW4608-01] Aldrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Page 36 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ra M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3958373 FSO RPD [ZW4608-01] a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 NC % 40 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 40 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Lindane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Endrin 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 NC (5) % 40 Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 NC % 40 Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 NC % 40 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 NC % 50 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 NC % 50 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Mirex 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Toxaphene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 3958424 SAC Matrix Spike Chromium (VI) 2015/03/24 89 % 75-125 QC Standard Chromium (VI) 2015/03/24 98 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/24 101 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/24 <0.2 ug/g RPD Chromium (VI) 2015/03/24 NC % 35 3958670 JOH Matrix Spike Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/25 101 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/25 103 % 75-125 Method Blank Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/25 <0.050 ug/g RPD Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/25 NC % 40 3959036 LRA Matrix Spike [ZW4608-03] 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/25 95 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/25 96 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/25 81 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/25 96 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/25 67 % 60-140 Toluene 2015/03/25 68 % 60-140 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/25 76 % 60-140 Page 37 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3959036 LRA Matrix Spike [ZW4608-03] o -Xylene 2015/03/25 77 % 60-140 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/25 70 % 60-140 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/25 68 % 60-140 Spiked Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/25 97 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/25 95 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/25 100 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/25 101 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/25 100 % 60-140 Toluene 2015/03/25 101 % 60-140 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/25 113 % 60-140 o -Xylene 2015/03/25 110 % 60-140 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/25 104 % 60-140 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/25 96 % 80-120 Method Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/25 102 % 60-140 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/25 92 % 60-140 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/25 93 % 60-140 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/25 115 % 60-140 Benzene 2015/03/25 <0.005 ug/g Toluene 2015/03/25 <0.02 ug/g Ethylbenzene 2015/03/25 <0.01 ug/g o -Xylene 2015/03/25 <0.02 ug/g p+m-Xylene 2015/03/25 <0.04 ug/g Total Xylenes 2015/03/25 <0.04 ug/g F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/25 <10 ug/g F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/25 <10 ug/g RPD [ZW4608-03] Benzene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Toluene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 o -Xylene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/25 NC % 50 Total Xylenes 2015/03/25 NC % 50 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/25 NC % 50 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/25 NC % 50 3959295 ZZ Matrix Spike o-Terphenyl 2015/03/25 85 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 85 % 50-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 94 % 50-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 97 % 50-130 Spiked Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/25 85 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 85 % 80-120 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 93 % 80-120 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 95 % 80-120 Method Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/25 88 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 <10 ug/g F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g RPD F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 3959401 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 92 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 101 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 96 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 <10 ug/g RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 9.5 % 40 3959476 BGI Matrix Spike Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Page 38 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M-Ell -a M Success Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3959476 BGI Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Method Blank Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g RPD Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/25 5.0 % 30 3959586 VIV Matrix Spike Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/25 106 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/25 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/25 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/25 105 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/25 100 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/25 105 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/25 109 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/25 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/25 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/25 106 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/25 99 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/25 103 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/25 110 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/25 99 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/25 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/25 106 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/25 107 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/25 101 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/25 106 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/25 102 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/25 104 % 75-125 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/25 NC % 75-125 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/25 109 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/25 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/25 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/25 111 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/25 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/25 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/25 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/25 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/25 111 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/25 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/25 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/25 99 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/25 99 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/25 100 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Page 39 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M-Ell -a M Success Through Scienceo A Bureau veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3959586 VIV Spiked Blank Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/25 97 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/25 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/25 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/25 89 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/25 104 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/25 102 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/25 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/25 105 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/25 101 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/25 103 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/25 99 % 80-120 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/25 104 % 80-120 Method Blank Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/25 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/25 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/25 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/25 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/25 <0.10 ug/g Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/25 <0.10 ug/g Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/25 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/25 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/25 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/25 <200 ug/g Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/25 <0.50 ug/g Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/25 <0.20 ug/g Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/25 <50 ug/g Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/25 <1.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/25 <0.050 ug/g Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/25 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/25 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/25 <0.050 ug/g Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/25 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/25 <5.0 ug/g Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/25 <0.050 ug/g RPD Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/25 2.8 % 30 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/25 1.8 % 30 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/25 6.2 % 30 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Page 40 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M- a 11 n Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545246 QA/QC Date Batch Analyzed Num Init QC Type Parameter /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3959586 VIV RPD Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/25 8.5 % 30 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/25 NC % 30 3962720 BIP QC Standard Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/27 101 % 75-125 Method Blank Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/27 <500 mg/kg RPD Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/25 2.8 % 35 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). ( 1 ) The matrix spike recovery was below the lower control limit. This may be due in part to the reducing environment of the sample. The matrix spike was reanalyzed to confirm result. (2) Recovery or RPD for this parameter is outside control limits. The overall quality control for this analysis meets acceptability criteria. (3) DL was raised due to matrix interference. (4) The recovery was below the lower control limit. This may represent a low bias in some results. (5) Detection Limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Page 41 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: 6545246 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Eva prrtllfe 4 F C�161t':��r Ewa Pranjic, M. in, Scientific Specialist Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5. 10.2 of ISOJEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 42 of 42 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site#: Small Craft Harbour Your C.O.C. #: 505414-03-01 Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B545248 Received: 2015/03/13,16:35 Sample Matrix: Water # Samples Received: 6 Success Through Sciences Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3566989 Version: 3R Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is Page 1 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Date Date Method Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Chromium (VI) in Water 5 N/A 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 7199 m Chromium (VI) in Water 1 N/A 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water 6 N/A 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00315 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water 6 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00316 CCME PHC-CWS m Mercury (low level) 1 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00453 EPA 7470 m Mercury (low level) 5 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00453 EPA 7470 m OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (1) 6 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 6 N/A 2015/03/26 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) 6 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270 m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water 2 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 R2.0 m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water 4 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 R2.0 m Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is Page 1 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Mc—iX�- c-ar" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Attention: Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Success Through Sciencee Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site#: Small Craft Harbour Your C.O.C. #: 505414-03-01 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3566989 Version: 3R CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT -2- limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (905) 817-5700 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 2 Page 2 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4613 ZW4614 ZW4614 ZW4615 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 3954033 Units SW15-03 SW15-02 SW15-02 Lab -Du QC -SW -15-01 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 Toluene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 Ethylbenzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 o -Xylene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 p+m-Xylene ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3954033 Total Xylenes ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3954033 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/L <25 <25 <25 25 3954033 F 1 (C6 -C 10) - BTEX ug/L <25 <25 <25 25 3954033 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <100 <100 <100 <100 100 3953724 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 <200 200 3953724 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 <200 200 3953724 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/L YES YES YES YES 3953724 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 107 106 107 3954033 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 97 96 101 13954033 D10-Ethylbenzene % 75 75 174 3954033 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 87 90 91 3954033 o-Terphenyl % 93 94 94 94 3953724 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4616 ZW4617 ZW4618 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 15:30 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SW15-07 SWI 5-01 SW15-08 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 Toluene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 Ethylbenzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 o -Xylene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3954033 p+m-Xylene ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3954033 Total Xylenes ug/L <0.40 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 3954033 F1(C6-C10) ug/L <25 <25 <25 25 3954033 F 1 (C6 -C 10) - BTEX ug/L <25 <25 <25 25 3954033 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <100 <100 <100 100 3953724 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 200 3953724 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 <200 200 3953724 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/L YES YES YES 3953724 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 110 108 111 3954033 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 98 96 95 3954033 D10-Ethylbenzene % 77 74 77 3954033 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 90 90 90 3954033 o-Terphenyl % 94 94 94 1 13953724 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 4 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF WATER Success Through Scienceo Maxxam ID ZW4613 ZW4614 ZW4615 ZW4616 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/10 15:30 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SWI 5-03 SW15-02 QC Batch QC -SW -15-01 SW15-07 RDL QC Batch lorganics otal Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 0.43 0.37 3953731 1 0.58 1 0.43 0.10 1 3954708 DL = Reportable Detection Limit C Batch = Quality Control Batch Maxxam ID ZW4617 ZW4618 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SW15-01 QC Batch SW15-08 RDL QC Batch iorganics otal Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 0.34 3954708 1 0.35 0.10 3954715 DL = Reportable Detection Limit !C Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 5 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4613 ZW4614 ZW4615 ZW4615 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/12 09:00 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SW15-03 QC Batch SWI 5-02 QC Batch QC -SW -15-01 QC -SW -15-01 RDL QC Batch Lab -Du Metals Chromium (VI) ug/L <0.50 3952984 <0.50 3953801 <0.50 0.50 3952984 Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.01 3952103 <0.01 3953156 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3953156 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Maxxam ID ZW4616 ZW4617 ZW4618 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 15:30 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SW15-07 SW15-01 SW15-08 RDL QC Batch Metals Chromium (VI) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3952984 Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3953156 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 6 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC -MS (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID ZW4613 ZW4614 ZW4615 ZW4616 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/10 15:30 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 3951830 Units SW15-03 SWI 5-02 QC -SW -15-01 SWI 5-07 RDL QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Acenaphthylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Chrysene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluorene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Naphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Phenanthrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 94 101 96 102 3951830 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 82 84 79 86 3951830 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 74 80 75 81+_13951830 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 7 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Science® Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC -MS (WATER) Maxxam ID ZW4617 ZW4618 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SWI 5-01 SW15-08 RDL QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Acenaphthylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Chrysene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Fluorene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Naphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Phenanthrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 3951830 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 106 98 3951830 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 91 84 3951830 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 83 74 3951830 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 8 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4613 ZW4614 ZW4615 ZW4616 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/10 15:30 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 3956946 Units SW15-03 SWI 5-02 QC -SW -15-01 SWI 5-07 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Chlordane (Total) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 DDT+ Metabolites ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Total Endosulfan ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Total PCB ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 13956946 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 a -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 g -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 o,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 o,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 13959716 o,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Lindane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 3959716 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endosulfan 11 ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 13959716 Endrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Heptachlor ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 <0.009 0.009 13959716 Hexachloroethane ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3959716 Methoxychlor ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3959716 Aroclor 1016 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 9 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4613 ZW4614 ZW4615 ZW4616 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/10 15:30 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 3959716 Units SW15-03 SWI 5-02 QC -SW -15-01 SWI 5-07 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1221 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1232 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1242 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1248 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1254 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 13959716 Aroclor 1260 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1262 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1268 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 alpha -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 beta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 delta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3959716 Endosulfan sulfate ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endrin aldehyde ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endrin ketone ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Mirex ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Octachlorostyrene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Oxychlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Toxaphene ug/L <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3959716 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 71 79 84 83 3959716 Decachlorobiphenyl % 106 110 108 102 13959716 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 10 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Maxxam ID ZW4617 ZW4618 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SWI 5-01 SW15-08 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Chlordane (Total) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 DDT+ Metabolites ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Total Endosulfan ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3956946 Total PCB ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3956946 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Dieldrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 a -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 g -Chlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 o,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 p,p-DDD ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 o,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 p,p-DDE ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 o,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 p,p-DDT ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Lindane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 0.003 3959716 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endosulfan II ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Heptachlor ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <0.009 <0.009 0.009 3959716 Hexachloroethane ug/L <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3959716 Methoxychlor ug/L <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3959716 Aroclor 1016 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 11 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Success Through Sciences Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (WATER) Maxxam ID ZW4617 ZW4618 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 505414-03-01 505414-03-01 Units SWI 5-01 SW15-08 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1221 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1232 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1242 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1248 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1254 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1260 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1262 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 Aroclor 1268 ug/L <0.05 <0.05 0.05 3959716 alpha -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 beta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 delta -BHC ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3959716 Endosulfan sulfate ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endrin aldehyde ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Endrin ketone ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Mirex ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Octachlorostyrene ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Oxychlordane ug/L <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3959716 Toxaphene ug/L <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3959716 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 75 85 3959716 Decachlorobiphenyl % 94 107 3959716 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 12 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca MSX- -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID ZW4613 Sample ID SW15-03 Matrix Water Test Descrintion Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Test Summary Success Through Science® Collected 2015/03/09 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3952984 N/A 2015/03/19 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3954033 N/A 2015/03/19 Anca Ganea Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Mercury low level CV/AA 3952103 2015/03/18 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3959716 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 Mahmudul Khan OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956946 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4614 Sample ID SW15-02 Matrix Water Tact r)acrrintinn Inctrumantatinn Ratrh Frtrnrtarl AnAlv7arl Collected 2015/03/10 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvct Chromium VI in Water IC 3953801 N/A 2015/03/20 Manom Gera Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3954033 N/A 2015/03/19 Anca Ganea Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Mercury low level CV/AA 3953156 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3959716 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 Mahmudul Khan OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956946 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GUMS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3953731 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4614 Dup Collected 2015/03/10 Sample ID SW15-02 Shipped Matrix Water Received 2015/03/13 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Maxxam ID ZW4615 Sample ID QC -SW -15-01 Matrix Water Tact rlacrrintinn Inctriimontatinn Ratrh Frtrnrtarl Ona1v7ar1 Collected 2015/03/12 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvct Chromium VI in Water IC 3952984 N/A 2015/03/19 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3954033 N/A 2015/03/19 Anca Ganea Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Mercury low level CV/AA 3953156 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3959716 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 Mahmudul Khan OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956946 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GUMS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3954708 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Page 13 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Test Summary Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciences Maxxam ID ZW4615 Dup Collected 2015/03/12 Sample ID QC -SW -15-01 Shipped Matrix Water Received 2015/03/13 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analyzed Analyst Mercur low level CV/AA 3953156 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison Maxxam ID ZW4616 Collected 2015/03/10 Sample ID SW15-07 Shipped Matrix Water Received 2015/03/13 Test Descrintinn Instrumentation Batch Extracted AnaIVZe-d Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3952984 N/A 2015/03/19 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3954033 N/A 2015/03/19 Anca Ganea Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Mercury low level CV/AA 3953156 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3959716 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 Mahmudul Khan OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956946 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3954708 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4617 Sample ID SW15-01 Matrix Water Test Descrintion Instrumentation Batch Extracted Analvzed Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvst Chromium VI in Water IC 3952984 N/A 2015/03/19 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3954033 N/A 2015/03/19 Anca Ganea Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Mercury low level CV/AA 3953156 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3959716 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 Mahmudul Khan OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956946 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GUMS SIM GC/MS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3954708 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Maxxam ID ZW4618 Sample ID SW15-08 Matrix Water Tact rlacrrintinn Inctriimantatinn Ratrh Fxtrnrtad Ana1V7ad Collected 2015/03/11 Shipped Received 2015/03/13 Analvct Chromium VI in Water IC 3952984 N/A 2015/03/19 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Wat HSGC/MSFD 3954033 N/A 2015/03/19 Anca Ganea Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water GC/FID 3953724 2015/03/19 2015/03/20 Zhi ue Frank Zhu Mercury low level CV/AA 3953156 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 Ron Morrison OC Pesticides Selected & PCB GC/ECD 3959716 2015/03/25 2015/03/26 Mahmudul Khan OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3956946 N/A 2015/03/26 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS SIM GUMS 3951830 2015/03/18 2015/03/18 Yuan Zhou Total Kmeldahl Nitrogen in Water KONE 3954715 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Rani T a i Page 14 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 rax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Wernas Group Company Maxxam Job #: 6545248 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Package 1 -2.3°C Package 2 -0.7°C Package 3 -1.7°C Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt GENERAL COMMENTS Revised Report (2015/07/08): OC pesticide and metals parameters revised Page 15 of 22 Success Through Scienceo Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: MB545248 Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3951830 YZ Matrix Spike D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/18 88 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/18 40(l) % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 78 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 83 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 81 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/18 81 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 35 (2) % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 19 (3) % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 20 (3) % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 14 (3) % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 20 (3) % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/18 33 (3) % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 12 (3) % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 66 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/18 84 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 17 (3) % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 90 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 86 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/18 80 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 80 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/18 61 % 50-130 Spiked Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/18 97 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/18 82 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 80 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 87 % 50-130 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 85 % 50-130 Anthracene 2015/03/18 94 % 50-130 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 88 % 50-130 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 87 % 50-130 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 87 % 50- 130 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 69 % 50-130 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 87 % 50-130 Chrysene 2015/03/18 95 % 50-130 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 44 (4) % 50-130 Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 94 % 50-130 Fluorene 2015/03/18 86 % 50-130 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 88 % 50-130 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 95 % 50-130 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 91 % 50-130 Naphthalene 2015/03/18 84 % 50-130 Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 89 % 50-130 Pyrene 2015/03/18 95 % 50-130 Method Blank D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/18 98 % 50-130 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/18 79 % 50-130 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 78 % 50-130 Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Anthracene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Chrysene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Page 16 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (505) 817-5700 Toll-l-ree: 800-563-6266 Fax(905) 817-5777 www.maxxarn.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545248 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3951830 YZ Method Blank Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Fluorene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Naphthalene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L Pyrene 2015/03/18 <0.010 ug/L RPD Acenaphthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Anthracene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Chrysene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Fluoranthene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Fluorene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Naphthalene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Phenanthrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 Pyrene 2015/03/18 NC % 30 3952103 RON Matrix Spike Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 94 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 99 % 80-120 Method Blank Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 <0.01 ug/L RPD Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3952984 SAC Matrix Spike Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 97 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L RPD Chromium (VI) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3953156 RON Matrix Spike [ZW4615-10] Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 114 % 75-125 Spiked Blank Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Method Blank Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 <0.01 ug/L RPD [ZW4615-10] Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3953724 ZZ Matrix Spike [ZW4613-03] o-Terphenyl 2015/03/20 97 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 106 % 50-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 114 % 50-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 113 % 50-130 Spiked Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/20 97 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 108 % 60-130 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 112 % 60-130 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 115 % 60-130 Method Blank o-Terphenyl 2015/03/20 94 % 60-130 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 <100 ug/L F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 <200 ug/L F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 <200 ug/L RPD [ZW4614-03] F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 NC % 30 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 NC % 30 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/20 NC % 30 Page 17 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545248 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3953731 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 100 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 98 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 <0.10 mg/L RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/19 NC % 20 3953801 MGE Matrix Spike Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 109 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 100 % 80-120 Method Blank Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 <0.50 ug/L RPD Chromium (VI) 2015/03/20 NC % 20 3954033 AGA Matrix Spike 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/19 114 % 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/19 106 % 70-130 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/19 88 % 70-130 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/19 92 % 70-130 Benzene 2015/03/19 95 % 70-130 Toluene 2015/03/19 97 % 70-130 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 105 % 70-130 o -Xylene 2015/03/19 104 % 70-130 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 97 % 70-130 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 78 % 70-130 Spiked Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/19 106 % 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/19 101 % 70-130 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/19 83 % 70-130 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/19 96 % 70-130 Benzene 2015/03/19 93 % 70-130 Toluene 2015/03/19 91 % 70-130 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 98 % 70-130 o -Xylene 2015/03/19 98 % 70-130 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 91 % 70-130 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 97 % 70-130 Method Blank 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/19 102 % 70-130 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/19 105 % 70-130 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/19 95 % 70-130 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/19 97 % 70-130 Benzene 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/L Toluene 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/L Ethylbenzene 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/L o -Xylene 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/L p+m-Xylene 2015/03/19 <0.40 ug/L Total Xylenes 2015/03/19 <0.40 ug/L F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 <25 ug/L F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/19 <25 ug/L RPD F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/19 NC % 30 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/19 NC % 30 3954708 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 94 % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 87 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 92 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 <0.10 mg/L RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 9.3 % 20 3954715 RTY Matrix Spike Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 NC % 80-120 QC Standard Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 84 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 93 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 <0.10 mg/L RPD Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/03/20 1.4 % 20 3959716 MAK Spiked Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/26 75 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/26 115 % 50-130 Page 18 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group company QA/QC Recovery Batch QC Limits Num Init QC Type 3959716 MAK Spiked Blank 0.33 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.57 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.16 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.18 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.15 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.13 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.44 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 5.8 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 0.0098 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 1.5 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 2.2 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 1.7 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 1.1 RPD % Spiked Blank RPD % Spiked Blank 1.6 RPD % Spiked Blank Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545248 Parameter Aldrin Aldrin Dieldrin Dieldrin a -Chlordane a -Chlordane g -Chlordane g -Chlordane o,p-DDD o,p-DDD p,p-DDD p,p-DDD o,p-DDE o,p-DDE p,p-DDE p,p-DDE o,p-DDT o,p-DDT p,p-DDT p,p-DDT Lindane Lindane Endosulfan I (alpha) Endosulfan I (alpha) Endosulfan 11 Endosulfan 11 Endrin Endrin Heptachlor Heptachlor Heptachlor epoxide Heptachlor epoxide Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobenzene Hexachlorobutadiene Hexachlorobutadiene Hexachloroethane Hexachloroethane Methoxychlor Methoxychlor alpha -BHC alpha -BHC beta -BHC beta -BHC delta -BHC delta -BHC Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Endosulfan sulfate Endosulfan sulfate Endrin aldehyde Endrin aldehyde Endrin ketone Endrin ketone Mirex Page 19 of 22 Date Analyzed /yyy/mm/dc 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 2015/03/26 Success Through Science® Value Recovery Units QC Limits 79 % 50-130 0.33 % 30 119 % 50-130 0.57 % 30 102 % 50-130 0.16 % 30 103 % 50-130 0.18 % 30 112 % 50-130 0.15 % 30 109 % 50-130 0.13 % 30 94 % 50-130 0.44 % 30 90 % 50-130 5.8 % 30 102 % 50-130 0.0098 % 30 106 % 50-130 1.5 % 30 97 % 50-130 2.2 % 30 90 % 50-130 1.7 % 30 105 % 50-130 1.1 % 30 101 % 50-130 1.6 % 30 93 % 50-130 0.43 % 30 103 % 50-130 1.1 % 30 90 % 50-130 3.0 % 30 89 % 50-130 2.5 % 30 70 % 50-130 2.6 % 30 125 % 50-130 0.54 % 30 92 % 30-130 1.9 % 40 83 % 30-130 1.9 % 40 84 % 30-130 0.99 % 40 84 % 30-130 3.0 % 40 109 % 30-130 0.56 % 40 111 % 30-130 1.9 % 40 113 % 30-130 1.4 % 40 103 % 30-130 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545248 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery Units QC Limits 3959716 MAK RPD Mirex 2015/03/26 1.7 % 40 Spiked Blank Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/26 90 % 30-130 RPD Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/26 2.9 % 40 Spiked Blank Oxychlordane 2015/03/26 91 % 30-130 RPD Oxychlordane 2015/03/26 0.25 % 30 Method Blank 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/26 82 % 50-130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/26 113 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Dieldrin 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L a -Chlordane 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L g -Chlordane 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L o,p-DDD 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L p,p-DDD 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L o,p-DDE 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L p,p-DDE 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L o,p-DDT 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L p,p-DDT 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Lindane 2015/03/26 <0.003 ug/L Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Endosulfan 11 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Endrin 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Heptachlor 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/26 <0.009 ug/L Hexachloroethane 2015/03/26 <0.01 ug/L Methoxychlor 2015/03/26 <0.01 ug/L Aroclor 1016 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1221 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1232 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1242 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1248 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1254 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1260 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1262 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L Aroclor 1268 2015/03/26 <0.05 ug/L alpha -BHC 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L beta -BHC 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L delta -BHC 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/26 <0.02 ug/L Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Endrin ketone 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Mirex 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Oxychlordane 2015/03/26 <0.005 ug/L Toxaphene 2015/03/26 <0.2 u /L Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. Page 20 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M -El -a r" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Stantec Consulting Ltd Attention: Alicja Wierzbicka Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: 1630ONR Site Location: Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: MB545248 Success Through Science® NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). ( 1) Surrogate recovery may have been impacted by the amount of sediment that was present in sample. ( 2) The recoveries for the flagged target analytes were below the lower control limits due to the presence of sediment and emulsion during processing. Results reported for the flagged analytes may have an associated low bias. (3) Recovery or RPD for this parameter is outside control limits. The overall quality control for this analysis meets acceptability criteria. ( 4 ) The recovery for the flagged target analyte was below the lower control limit as stipulated by Ontario Regulation 153, however, this recovery is still within Maxxam's performance based lower limits. Results reported for this specific analyte with spike recoveries within this range are still valid but may have an associated low bias. Page 21 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ra M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: B545248 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Brad Newman, Scientific Specialist E�V,a 111C qR carr 4' Ewa Pranjic, M. ., m, Scientific Specialist Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISOAEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 22 of 22 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax_ (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M c—i X�- c� t -Yl A Bureau Veritas Group Company Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545248 Your C.O.C. #: 08404720 Attention: Parnian Baber MAXXAM ANALYTICS CAMPOBELLO 6740 CAMPOBELLO ROAD MISSISSAUGA, ON CANADA L5N 21-8 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B521988 Received: 2015/03/18, 09:00 Sample Matrix: Water # Samples Received: 6 Success Through Science® Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R1993207 Version: 5R Date Date Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Analytical Method Na, K, Ca, Mg, S by CRC ICPMS (total) 6 2015/03/18 2015/03/20 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Elements by CRC ICPMS (total) 6 2015/03/19 2015/03/19 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Tabitha Rudkin, AScT, Burnaby Project Manager Email: TRudkin@maxxam.ca Phone# (604) 638-2639 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 1 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Max— Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 11<5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 1 of 7 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B521988 Report Date: 2015/07/08 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545248 CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Success Through Science® MaxxamID LX0920 LX0921 LX0922 LX0923 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 13:00 2015/03/10 10:15 2015/03/12 09:00 2015/03/10 15:30 COC Number 08404720 08404720 08404720 08404720 7841249 UNITS SWI 5-03 ZW4613-08 SW15-02 ZW4614-08 QC -SW -15-01 ZW4615-08 SW15-07 RDL QC Batch ZW4616-08 Total Metals by ICPMS Total Aluminum (Al) ug/L 139 149 473 143 3.0 7841249 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841249 Total Arsenic (As) ug/L 0.43 0.38 0.49 0.38 0.10 7841249 Total Barium (Ba) ug/L 42.6 44.0 49.6 45.2 1.0 7841249 Total Beryllium (Be) ug/L <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841249 Total Bismuth (Bi) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Boron (B) ug/L <50 <50 <50 <50 50 7841249 Total Cadmium (Cd) ug/L 0.012 <0.010 0.015 <0.010 0.010 7841249 Total Chromium (Cr) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Cobalt (Co) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841249 Total Copper (Cu) ug/L 1.77 1.30 2.09 1.12 0.50 7841249 Total Iron (Fe) ug/L 325 304 694 308 10 7841249 Total Lead (Pb) ug/L 0.24 <0.20 0.57 <0.20 0.20 7841249 Total Manganese (Mn) ug/L 47.4 43.2 64.3 43.9 1.0 7841249 Total Molybdenum (Mo) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Nickel (Ni) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.1 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Phosphorus (P) ug/L 48 25 46 25 10 7841249 Total Selenium (Se) ug/L 0.22 <0.10 0.15 0.20 0.10 7841249 Total Silver (Ag) ug/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 0.020 7841249 Total Strontium (Sr) ug/L 307 319 314 313 1.0 7841249 Total Thallium (TI) ug/L <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7841249 Total Tin (Sn) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Titanium (Ti) ug/L 5.2 <5.0 23.3 6.1 5.0 7841249 Total Uranium (U) ug/L 0.80 0.78 0.78 0.78 0.10 7841249 Total Vanadium (V) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Zinc (Zn) ug/L 46.2 <5.0 5.1 18.5 5.0 7841249 Total Calcium (Ca) mg/L 87.3 90.5 86.8 90.0 0.050 7839576 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 16.9 16.4 16.9 16.8 0.050 7839576 Total Potassium (K) mg/L 2.35 2.49 2.72 2.50 0.050 7839576 Total Sodium (Na) mg/L 24.9 25.8 57.8 28.6 0.050 7839576 Total Sulphur (S) mg/L 11.5 9.2 12.6 11.5 3.0 7839576 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 2 of 7 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B521988 Report Date: 2015/07/08 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545248 CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Maxxam ID LX0924 LX0925 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 09:00 2015/03/11 12:15 COC Number 08404720 08404720 152 UNITS SW15-01 ZW4617-08 SWI 5-08 RDL QC Batch ZW4618-08 Total Metals by ICPMS Total Aluminum (Al) ug/L 173 152 3.0 7841249 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841249 Total Arsenic (As) ug/L 0.42 0.39 0.10 7841249 Total Barium (Ba) ug/L 43.4 47.5 1.0 7841249 Total Beryllium (Be) ug/L <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7841249 Total Bismuth (Bi) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Boron (B) ug/L <50 <50 50 7841249 Total Cadmium (Cd) ug/L <0.010 0.012 0.010 7841249 Total Chromium (Cr) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 17841249 Total Cobalt (Co) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7841249 Total Copper (Cu) ug/L 1.23 1.47 0.50 7841249 Total Iron (Fe) ug/L 360 323 10 7841249 Total Lead (Pb) ug/L 0.25 0.27 0.20 7841249 Total Manganese (Mn) ug/L 44.2 44.3 1.0 7841249 Total Molybdenum (Mo) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Nickel (Ni) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7841249 Total Phosphorus (P) ug/L 35 24 10 7841249 Total Selenium (Se) ug/L 0.16 0.18 0.10 7841249 Total Silver (Ag) ug/L <0.020 <0.020 0.020 7841249 Total Strontium (Sr) ug/L 309 322 1.0 7841249 Total Thallium (TI) ug/L <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7841249 Total Tin (Sn) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Titanium (Ti) ug/L 22.5 5.7 5.0 7841249 Total Uranium (U) ug/L 0.76 0.78 0.10 7841249 Total Vanadium (V) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Zinc (Zn) ug/L 27.9 <5.0 5.0 7841249 Total Calcium (Ca) mg/L 86.8 89.4 0.050 7839576 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 16.4 17.4 0.050 7839576 Total Potassium (K) mg/L 1 2.39 1 2.45 10.050 17839576 Total Sodium (Na) mg/L 40.3 51.6 0.050 7839576 Total Sulphur (S) mg/L 11.4 14.3 3.0 17839576 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 3 of 7 Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B521988 Report Date: 2015/07/08 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: MB545248 Success Through Scienceo Package 1 Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt General Comments Revised Report (Version:2): Parameters that had not been requested have been removed. (TWI). Revised Report (Version:3): Parameters that had not been requested have been removed. and Phosphorous has been added as per client request(TWI). Results relate only to the items tested. Page 4 of 7 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: VB521988 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: Parnian Baber Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: Site Location: MB545248 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7841249 AD5 Matrix Spike Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 113 % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 116 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 128(l) % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 90 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 NC % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 109 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 99 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 107 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 105 % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 106 % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 108 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 97 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 103 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 95 % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 104 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 102 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 110 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/19 101 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/19 <3.0 ug/L Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L Total Arsenic (As) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Barium (Ba) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Boron (B) 2015/03/19 <50 ug/L Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 5 of 7 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: Parnian Baber Client Project #: 122511075 P.O. #: Site Location: MB545248 Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: VB521988 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7841249 AD5 Method Blank Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/19 <0.010 ug/L Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L Total Copper (Cu) 2015/03/19 <0.50 ug/L Total Iron (Fe) 2015/03/19 <10 ug/L Total Lead (Pb) 2015/03/19 <0.20 ug/L Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/19 <10 ug/L Total Selenium (Se) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Silver (Ag) 2015/03/19 0.020, RDL=0.020 ug/L Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/19 <1.0 ug/L Total Thallium (TI) 2015/03/19 <0.050 ug/L Total Tin (Sn) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L Total Uranium (U) 2015/03/19 <0.10 ug/L Total Vanadium (V) 2015/03/19 <5.0 ug/L Total Zinc Zn 2015/03/19 <5.0 u /L Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). ( 1 ) Recovery or RPD for this parameter is outside control limits. The overall quality control for this analysis meets acceptability criteria. Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1 K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 6 of 7 M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: 6521988 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Rob Reinert, Data Vali ation Coordinator Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5. 10.2 of ISOJEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 7 of 7 Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 MAXXAM JOB #: B547816 Received: 2015/03/18, 17:55 Sample Matrix: SEDIMENT # Samples Received: 6 Analyses Success Through Science Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 505779-01-01 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3566990 Version: 2 - Revision CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT Date Date Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Methylnaphthalene Sum (1) 6 N/A 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00301 EPA 8270D m Hot Water Extractable Boron (1) 6 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00408 R153 Ana. Prot. 2011 Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC (1, 2) 6 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 3060/7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil 6 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 OTT SOP -00002 CCME CWS Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil 6 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 OTT SOP -00001 CCME CWS Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS (1) 6 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP (1) 6 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00408 EPA 6010C m MOISTURE 6 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00445 McKeague 2nd ed 1978 OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (1, 3) 6 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 OC Pesticides Summed Parameters (1) 6 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) (1) 6 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil (1) 6 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 m Total Organic Carbon in Soil (1) 6 N/A 2015/03/27 CAM SOP -00468 LECO 203-601-224 Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Page 1 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit 111000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca MaX20am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 505779-01-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B547816 Received: 2015/03/18, 17:55 (1) This test was performed by Maxxam Analytics Mississauga (2) Soils are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise specified. (3) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (613) 274-0573 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3566990 Version: 2 - Revision Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total Cover Pages : 2 Page 2 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7.16 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-12 SD15-12 Lab-Dup SD15-13 SD15-10 SD15-14 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3958227 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.16 <0.050 0.050 3958670 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 280 290 310 280 220 50 3959476 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 1600 1700 2700 1600 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958633 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.2 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 8.1 8.4 16 8.2 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958633 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3958633 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 75000 71000 59000 57000 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 17 6.5 5.0 3.5 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 2.7 1.8 2.5 1.5 0.10 3958633 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 2.2 3.8 5.5 2.4 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 27000 8900 6200 4400 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 4.0 3.2 4.4 3.0 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 1.2 1.9 3.8 2.3 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 12000 11000 9800 7900 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 210 180 240 160 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 4.2 3.4 5.1 3.3 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 1500 750 450 360 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 210 270 420 280 200 3958633 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958633 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 69 69 80 <50 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 92 86 76 74 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958633 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) ug/g 140 130 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.58 0.35 0.26 0.22 0.050 3958633 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 3 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #f1000, Nepea n, 0N K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-12 SD15-12 SD15-13 SD15-10 Lab-Dup SD15-14 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 63 18 8.4 6.4 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 33 19 23 15 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.0501 3958633 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 4 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON ICE 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX6293 ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units QCSD15-01 QC Batch SD15-15 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 3958224 <0.2 1 0.2 1 3958227 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g <0.050 3958670 <0.050 0.050 3958670 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 210 3959476 370 50 3959476 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 1600 3958633 2000 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 3958633 <0.20 0.20 3958633 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.2 3958633 1.3 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 7.7 3958633 10 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 3958633 <0.20 0.20 3958633 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 3958633 <1.0 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 3958633 <5.0 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 3958633 <0.10 0.10 3958633 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 57000 3958633 70000 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 5.0 3958633 4.4 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 1.6 3958633 2.0 0.10 3958633 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 2.9 3958633 4.8 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 6400 3958633 5800 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 2.9 3958633 3.5 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 2.1 3958633 3.1 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 7700 3958633 12000 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 160 3958633 230 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 3958633 <0.50 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 3.3 3958633 4.0 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 400 3958633 480 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 240 3958633 340 200 3958633 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 3958633 <0.50 0.50 3958633 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 3958633 <0.20 0.20 3958633 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g <50 3958633 70 50 3958633 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 72 3958633 89 1.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 3958633 <0.050 0.050 3958633 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 3958633 <5.0 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) ug/g 160 3958633 150 5.0 3958633 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.23 3958633 0.30 0.050 3958633 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 12 3958633 9.2 5.0 3958633 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 5 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #f1000, Nepea n, 0N K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX6293 ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units QCSD15-01 QC Batch SD15-15 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 1 9.9 1 3958633 17 1 5.0 1 3958633 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) I ug/g I <0.050 1 3958633 <0.050 1 0.050 3958633 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 6 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON ICZE 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 ZX6293 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-12 SD15-12 Lab-Dup SD15-13 SD15-10 SD15-14 QCSD15-01 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.00203954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.00203955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0026 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan 11 ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g- <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 7 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #f1000, Nepea n, 0N K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 ZX6293 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-12 SD15-12 Lab-Dup SD15-13 SD15-10 SD15-14 QCSD15-01 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g- <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentad iene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery(%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 73 79 79 70 76 81 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 100 113 104 114 105 106 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 8 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #f1000, Nepea n, 0N K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units SD15-15 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g 1 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g 1 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor1016 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1221 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1232 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1242 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 9 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON ICZE 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units SD15-15 RDL QC Batch Aroclor1248 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1254 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1260 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1262 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor1268 ug/g <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g 1 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 76 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 99 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 10 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON ICZE 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 ZX6292 ZX6293 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-12 SD15-13 SD15-10 SD15-14 SD15-14 Lab-Dup QCSD15-01 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 <0.0071 0.0071 3953360 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0078 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0067 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.011 <0.0050 0.0062 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0084 <0.0050 0.0056 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.022 0.0059 0.012 0.0096 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.016 <0.0050 0.0067 1 0.0064 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.018 0.0065 0.010 1 0.0096 10.00501 3955279 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 94 97 96 96 94 99 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 83 88 87 87 85 89 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 79 83 84 81 80 85 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 11 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #f1000, Nepea n, 0N K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units SD15-15 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 0.0071 3953360 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anth racene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.00501 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 99 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 89 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 84 3955279 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 12 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit ti1000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 ZX6293 505779-01-01 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 Moisture % COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 10 3959401 Units SD15-12 SD15-13 SD15-13 Lab-Dup SD15-10 SD15-14 QCSD15-01 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Moisture % 17 20 18 25 20 18 0.2 3954723 Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 3900 4100 4200 4000 2900 3400 500 3962720 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 51 60 310 77 65 10 3959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Maxxam ID ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units SD15-15 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Moisture % 17 0.2 3954723 Total Organic Carbon mg/kg 2500 500 3962720 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 74 10 3959401 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 13 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit ti1000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX6288 ZX6288 ZX6289 ZX6289 ZX6291 ZX6292 Sampling Date 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/13 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-12 SD15-12 Lab-Dup SD15-13 SD15-13 Lab-Dup SD15-10 SD15-14 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.03 <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954743 F2 -F4 Hydrocarbons F2 (CIO -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 96 95 97 97 97 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 106 101 103 100 101 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 96 90 93 97 95 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 100 99 102 101 101 3954743 o-Terphenyl % 103 97 103 100 102 3954731 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 14 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #f1000, Nepea n, 0N K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Maxxam ID ZX6293 ZX6294 Sampling Date 2015/03/16 2015/03/16 COC Number 505779-01-01 505779-01-01 Units QCSD15-01 SD15-15 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 10 3954743 F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (CIO -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 96 95 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 103 103 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 99 90 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 99 100 3954743 o-Terphenyl % 103 102 3954731 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 15 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON ICZE 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID: ZX6288 Sample ID: SD15-12 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS TEST SUMMARY Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/13 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958227 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958633 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID: ZX6288 Dup Sample ID: SD15-12 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Collected: 2015/03/13 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958227 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru Maxxam ID: ZX6289 Sample ID: SD15-13 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Collected: 2015/03/13 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958227 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958633 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen -Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Page 16 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7.16 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: ZX6289 Dup Sample ID: SD15-13 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected: 2015/03/13 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID: ZX6291 Collected: 2015/03/16 Sample ID: SD15-10 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958227 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958633 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID: ZX6292 Sample ID: SD15-14 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Collected: 2015/03/16 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958227 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958633 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Page 17 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7.16 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: ZX6292 Dup Sample ID: SD15-14 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected: 2015/03/16 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Maxxam ID: ZX6293 Collected: 2015/03/16 Sample ID: QCSD15-01 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958633 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Maxxam ID: ZX6294 Sample ID: SD15-15 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Collected: 2015/03/16 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958670 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958227 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958633 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Grace Bu Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3959476 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Balwant Gill MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Total Organic Carbon in Soil COMB 3962720 N/A 2015/03/27 Birenkumar Patel Page 18 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit 111000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 GENERAL COMMENTS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt Package 1 3.0°C Revised Report (07/08/2015): Parameters for metals and OC Pesticides were amended Cooler custody seal was present and intact. Results relate only to the items tested. Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Science Page 19 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7.16 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca M a)(�" a m A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencea, Page 20 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7J6 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 3954731 o-Terphenyl 2015/03/21 111 30-130 106 30-130 106 % 3954743 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/24 101 60-140 101 60-140 96 % 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/24 91 60-140 93 60-140 101 % 3954743 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/24 90 30-130 87 30-130 90 % 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/24 105 60-140 104 60-140 108 % 3955180 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 78 SO- 130 78 50- 130 83 % 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/25 107 50- 130 96 50- 130 110 % 3955279 D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/20 95 50-130 93 50-130 93 % 3955279 D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/20 87 50-130 82 50-130 82 % 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/20 82 50-130 82 50-130 82 % 3954723 Moisture 2015/03/23 8.6 50 3954731 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80- 120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 SO- 130 90 80- 120 <50 ug/g NC 50 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 SO- 130 90 80- 120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Benzene 2015/03/24 80 60-140 82 60-140 <0.005 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/24 90 60-140 81 60-140 <0.01 ug/g NC 50 3954743 F1(C6-C10)-BTEX 2015/03/24 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 F1(C6-C10) 2015/03/24 99 60-140 94 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 o -Xylene 2015/03/24 75 60-140 83 60-140 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 3954743 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/24 72 60-140 78 60-140 <0.04 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Toluene 2015/03/24 77 60-140 88 60-140 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Total Xylenes 2015/03/24 <0.04 ug/g NC 50 3955180 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 76 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aldrin 2015/03/25 76 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 75 30-130 73 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 Page 20 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7J6 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca M a)(�" a m A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT-D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencea, Page 21 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7J6 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 3955180 Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 84 30-130 81 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 77 30-130 73 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 77 50-130 68 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 78 50- 130 74 50- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 80 SO -130 73 50- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 85 30- 130 83 30- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 79 30- 130 79 30- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 92 30-130 97 30- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin 2015/03/25 76 SO- 130 74 50- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 78 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 76 50-130 73 50- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 74 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 82 50- 130 84 50- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 S8 SO- 130 94 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 26(l) 30-130 82 30- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 52 SO -130 80 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Lindane 2015/03/25 79 50-130 76 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 93 50-130 90 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Mirex 2015/03/25 111 30-130 100 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 90 50-130 82 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 78 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 78 SO -130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 75 30- 130 71 30- 130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 87 50-130 78 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 76 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 80 50-130 80 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 Page 21 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7J6 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca M a)(�" a m A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT-D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 16300NR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencea, Page 22 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7J6 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 3955180 Toxaphene 2015/03/25 <0.080 ug/g NC 50 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/20 92 SO -130 93 SO -130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/20 89 50-130 90 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Acenaphthene 2015/03/20 84 50-130 85 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/20 83 50-130 83 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Anthracene 2015/03/20 88 SO- 130 87 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/20 96 50- 130 87 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/20 94 SO -130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/20 87 SO -130 84 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/20 89 50-130 88 50-130 <O.00SO ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/20 94 50- 130 91 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Chrysene 2015/03/20 93 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anth racene 2015/03/20 93 SO- 130 91 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Fluoranthene 2015/03/20 92 SO- 130 88 50- 130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Fluorene 2015/03/20 85 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/20 101 50-130 98 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Naphthalene 2015/03/20 81 50-130 83 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Phenanthrene 2015/03/20 84 SO -130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Pyrene 2015/03/20 92 50-130 89 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3958224 Chromium (VI) 2015/03/25 67 (2) 75-125 98 80-120 <0.2 ug/g NC 35 98 80-120 3958227 Chromium (VI) 2015/03/25 95 75- 125 98 80-120 <0.2 ug/g NC 35 93 80-120 3958633 Acid Extractable Aluminum (Al) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 100 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/24 105 75-125 106 80- 120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/24 101 75- 125 103 80- 120 <1.0 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/24 NC 75- 125 101 80- 120 <O.SO ug/g 3.5 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/24 99 75-125 92 80- 120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/24 97 75-125 101 80- 120 <1.0 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 91 80- 120 <5.0 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/24 103 75-125 101 80-120 <0.10 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 106 80- 120 <50 ug/g Page 22 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON K2E 7J6 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 23 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit 111000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 3958633 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/24 97 75-125 99 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 0.27 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/24 95 7S-125 100 80-120 <0.10 ug/g 3.4 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/24 93 75-125 99 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 2.3 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 102 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 18 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/24 98 75-125 91 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 97 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 98 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/24 105 75-125 105 80-120 <0.050 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/24 105 75-125 104 80-120 <0.50 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/24 90 75-125 99 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 0.74 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 98 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 93 80-120 <200 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 102 80-120 <0.50 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/24 103 75-125 104 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 80 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 105 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/24 98 75-125 101 80-120 <0.050 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/24 107 75-125 104 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Titanium (Ti) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 102 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 3958633 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/24 95 75-125 95 80-120 <0.050 ug/g 6.0 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/24 98 75-125 98 80-120 <5.0 ug/g NC 30 3958633 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 100 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 6.1 30 3958670 Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/25 101 75-125 103 75-125 <0.050 ug/g NC 40 3959401 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 92 80-120 96 80-120 <10 ug/g 9.5 40 101 80-120 3959476 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/25 NC 75-125 102 80-120 <50 ug/g 5.0 30 Page 23 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit 111000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Ma )(�"a m Success Through Sciencee, A Bureau Veritas Group company •0- Maxxam Job #: B547816 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/08 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery 1 QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 3962720 Total Organic Carbon 2015/03/27 <500 mg/kg 2.8 35 101 1 75-125 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). (1) The recovery was below the lower control limit. This may represent a low bias in some results for flagged analyte. (2) The matrix spike recovery was below the lower control limit. This may be due in part to the reducing environment of the sample. The matrix spike was reanalyzed to confirm result. Page 24 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit 111000, Nepean, ON K2E 716 Phone: 613 274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Maaoam A Bureau Veritas Group Company • Maxxam Job #: B547816 Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/08 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO FORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Cristina Carriere, Scientific Services vaPratlic q: Ewa Pranjic, M.ScLliem, Scientific Specialist Paul Rubinato, Analyst, Maxxam Analytics Success Through Science Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 25 of 25 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 32 Colonnade Rd, Unit #1000, Nepean, ON ICZE 7.16 Phone: 613.274-0573 Fax: 613 274-0574 Website: www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Your C.O.C. #: 505779-02-01, 505779-03-01, 505779-01-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B548083 Received: 2015/03/18, 17:57 Sample Matrix: SEDIMENT # Samples Received: 18 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3567023 Version: 2 - Revision Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Page 1 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Date Date Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Methylnaphthalene Sum 9 N/A 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00301 EPA 8270D m Semivolatile Organic Compounds (TCLP) 1 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00301 EPA 8270D m Hot Water Extractable Boron 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00408 R153 Ana. Prot. 2011 Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC (2) 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 3060/7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil (1) 9 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 OTT SOP -00002 CCME CWS Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil (1) 10 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 OTT SOP -00001 CCME CWS Mercury (TCLP Leachable) (mg/L) 1 N/A 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00453 EPA 7470A m Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Total Metals in TCLP Leachate by ICPMS 1 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00408 EPA 6010C m MOISTURE (1) 18 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00445 McKeague 2nd ed 1978 OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (3) 9 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 9 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 1 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 8 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m Polychlorinated Biphenyl in Leachate 1 2015/03/21 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00309 EPA 8082A m TCLP - %Solids 1 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00401 EPA 1311 Update I m TCLP - Extraction Fluid 1 N/A 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00401 EPA 1311 Update I m TCLP - Initial and final pH 1 N/A 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00401 EPA 1311 Update I m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil 9 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 m TCLP Zero Headspace Extraction 1 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00430 EPA 1311 m VOCs in ZHE Leachates 1 2015/03/23 2015/03/23 CAM SOP000226 EPA 8260C m Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Page 1 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Your C.O.C. #: 505779-02-01, 505779-03-01, 505779-01-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B548083 Received: 2015/03/18, 17:57 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3567023 Version: 2 - Revision The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) This test was performed by Maxxam Ottawa (2) Soils are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise specified. (3) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (905) 817-5700 Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total Cover Pages : 2 Page 2 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3958224 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.12 0.071 0.095 0.071 0.050 3958108 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 250 200 360 100 50 3958005 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 2500 1700 2100 1700 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 13 8.0 9.4 7.8 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 64000 55000 65000 49000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 5.5 4.4 5.4 5.9 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 2.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 4.4 2.8 4.7 1.9 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 6600 5200 5700 7700 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 3.7 2.8 3.2 2.4 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 3.9 2.7 3.4 2.2 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 12000 8200 12000 9000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 240 160 230 150 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 4.4 3.2 3.7 2.4 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 590 400 480 640 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 390 290 370 240 200 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 90 64 83 64 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 78 69 80 57 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 1 0.34 0.25 1 0.27 0.32 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 11 8.6 18.2 16 5.0 1 3958029 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 20 13 15 13 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958029 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 4 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 ZX7702 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 SD15-01 COMP 1,2 SD15-01 COMP 3,4 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3958224 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.089 0.39 <0.050 0.090 0.050 3958108 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 180 1000 100 120 50 3958005 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 2000 7600 1800 2000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g <1.0 3.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 9.6 45 8.9 10 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 0.37 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 6.7 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 0.18 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 52000 90000 50000 53000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 5.3 12 4.1 4.8 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 1.8 5.8 1.6 1.5 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 2.8 16 2.0 2.4 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 6300 16000 5300 5300 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 2.6 11 2.4 2.6 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 2.7 12 2.5 2.7 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 9300 19000 9000 9000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 180 580 160 170 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 1 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 3.1 12 2.6 2.6 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 510 790 450 440 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 310 1100 280 320 200 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 68 140 58 66 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 65 120 59 65 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 0.10 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.27 0.49 0.23 0.24 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 11 20 9.1 9.1 5.0 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 5 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 ZX7702 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP SD15-01 COMP 5,6 1,2 SD15-01 COMP 3,4 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 15 48 14 1 16 1 5.0 1 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 1 <0.050 10.0501 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 6 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 Units SD15-5 6COMP RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 0.2 3958224 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.22 0.050 3958108 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 270 50 3958005 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 3400 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.2 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 20 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 53000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 6.6 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 2.4 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 5.1 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 7300 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 4.7 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 4.6 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 9800 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 240 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 4.5 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 530 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 480 200 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 71 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 65 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 1 0.27 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 11 5.0 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 7 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 Units SD15-5 6COMP RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 23 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) I ug/g 1 <0.050 0.050 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 8 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0053 0.0064 0.0027 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 9 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/9 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 71 80 81 79 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 82 97 98 93 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 10 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 RDL SD15-02 COMP 5,6 RDL SD15-01 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0028 0.0020 0.035 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0028 0.0020 0.013 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.0026 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.0049 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.015 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0028 0.0020 0.013 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g 1 <0.0020 0.0020 0.0026 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 11 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 RDL SMS -02 COMP 5,6 RDL SD15-01 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyreneug/g I <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 0.080 <0.080 0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 80 64 75 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 95 115 92 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 12 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX7702 ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-01 COMP 3,4 SD15-01 COMP 5,6 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.00501 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 13 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX7702 ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-01 COMP 3,4 SD15-01 COMP 5,6 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentad iene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery(%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 74 80 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 90 105 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 14 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 QC Batch SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 3953360 <0.0071 <0.0071 1 0.0071 0.0071 3954282 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.012 3955279 0.0062 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.012 3955279 0.0057 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.00501 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.019 3955279 0.010 0.0060 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g 0.0079 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0057 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g 0.012 3955279 0.0077 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.032 3955279 0.020 0.012 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g 0.0091 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.019 3955279 0.011 0.0080 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g 0.025 3955279 0.017 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 95 3955279 94 96 91 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 86 3955279 85 87 82 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 83 3955279 81 84 77 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 15 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 ZX7702 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 SD15-01 COMP 1,2 SD15-01 COMP 3,4 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 0.016 <0.0071 <0.0071 0.0071 3954282 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0083 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.0065 0.037 <0.0050 0.0065 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.0055 0.042 <0.0050 0.0071 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0082 0.067 <0.0050 0.0092 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 0.033 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.023 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 0.041 <0.0050 0.0071 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anth race ne ug/g <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.015 0.095 <0.0050 0.016 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyre ne ug/g <0.0050 0.037 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0059 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.0055 0.048 <0.0050 0.0082 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g 0.011 0.076 <0.0050 0.013 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery(%) D10 -Anthracene % 93 95 96 96 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 82 85 85 85 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 80 81 82 81 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 16 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 Units SD15-061COMP RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 0.0071 3954282 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g I <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0068 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anth race ne ug/g 1 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.011 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyre ne ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g 0.0084 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 97 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 87 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 83 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 17 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP VOLATILE ORGANICS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Charge/Prep Analysis Amount Extracted (Wet Weight) (g) N/A 1 25 1 N/A 3955609 Volatile Organics Leachable Benzene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Carbon Tetrachloride mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Chlorobenzene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Chloroform mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene mg/L <0.050 0.050 3956961 Leachable 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene mg/L <0.050 0.050 3956961 Leachable 1,2-Dichloroethane mg/L <0.050 0.050 3956961 Leachable 1,1-Dichloroethylene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Methylene Chloride(Dichloromethane) mg/L <0.20 0.20 3956961 Leachable Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) mg/L. <1.0 1.0 3956961 Leachable Tetrachloroethylene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Trichloroethylene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Vinyl Chloride mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Surrogate Recovery (%) Leachable 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 100 3956961 Leachable D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 100 3956961 Leachable D8 -Toluene % 97 3956961 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch N/A = Not Applicable Success Through Science Page 18 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP LEACHATE PREPARATION (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Inorganics Final pH pH 6.11 3956226 Initial pH pH 9.25 3956226 TCLP - % Solids % 100 0.2 3956224 TCLP Extraction Fluid N/A FLUID 1 3956225 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 19 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP METALS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Metals Leachable Mercury (Hg) mg/L <0.0010 0.0010 3957822 Leachable Arsenic (As) mg/L <0.20 0.20 3958225 Leachable Barium (Ba) mg/L <0.20 0.20 3958225 Leachable Boron (B) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Cadmium (Cd) mg/L <0.050 0.050 1 3958225 Leachable Chromium (Cr) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Lead (Pb) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Selenium (Se) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Silver (Ag) mg/L <0.010 0.010 3958225 Leachable Uranium (U) mg/L <0.010 0.010 3958225 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 20 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP PCBS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch PCBs Leachable Total PCB ug/L <3.0 3.0 3956218 Surrogate Recovery I(%) Leachable Decachlorobiphenyl % 91 3956218 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 21 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Semivolatile Organics Leachable Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L <0.10 0.10 3957417 Leachable m/p-Cresol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable o -Cresol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable Cresol Total ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dichlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dinitrotoluene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Hexachloroethane ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Nitrobenzene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Pentachlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable Pyridine ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable 2,4,5 -Trichlorophenol ug/L <0.50 0.50 3957417 Leachable 2,4,6 -Trichlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Surrogate Recovery (%) Leachable 2,4,6-Tribromophenol % 64 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorobiphenyl % 53 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorophenol % 34 3957417 Leachable D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 67 3957417 Leachable D5 -Nitrobenzene % 65 3957417 Leachable D5 -Phenol % 25 3957417 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 22 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7612 ZX7613 ZX7614 ZX7615 ZX7616 ZX7617 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 Units SD15-03 SS2 SD15-03 SS7 SD15-02 SS2 SD15-02 SS4 SD15-02 SS6 SD15-01 SS2 RDL QC Batch Inorganics 16 27 0.2 1 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 85 Moisture % <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 1 3954723 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch 1,2,3 RDL QC Batch Maxxam ID ZX7618 ZX7619 ZX7695 ZX7695 ZX7696 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 505779-03-01 Units COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Moisture % 11 SD15-03 COMP 16 27 0.2 1 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 85 SD15-03 COMP 267 SD15-03 COMP 1 10 13959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Units SD15-01 SS4 SD15-01 SS6 1,2,3 RDL QC Batch 1,2,3 Lab-Dup 4,5 Inorganics Moisture % <0.2 <0.2 24 19 0.2 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 510 464 136 10 3959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Maxxam ID ZX7697 ZX7698 ZX7699 ZX7700 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Moisture % 11 20 16 27 0.2 1 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 85 85 267 1 776 1 10 13959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 23 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7701 ZX7702 ZX7702 ZX7703 ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-01-01 SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP Units 3,4 TCLP RDL QC Batch 1,2 3,4 Lab-Dup 5,6 Inorganics Moisture % 19 19 20 15 18 0.2 3954727 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 82 157 72 10 3959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 24 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7612 ZX7613 ZX7614 ZX7615 ZX7616 ZX7617 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 Units SD15-03 SS2 SD15-03 SS7 SD15-02 SS2 SD15-02 SS4 SD15-02 SS6 SD15-01 SS2 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954743 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 97 99 97 98 97 97 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 97 100 104 98 95 96 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 80 80 80 79 76 83 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 104 101 100 102 102 102 3954743 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 25 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7618 ZX7619 ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-01 SS4 SD15-01 SS6 SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 1 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 1 6,7 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 10 3954743 F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 102 97 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 93 90 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 85 76 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 106 102 3954743 o-Terphenyl % 98 100 93 3954731 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 26 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7698 ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 1,2 SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 SD15-01 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 11 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) o-Terphenyl % 100 96 95 101 3954731 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 27 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7702 ZX7703 ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-01 COMP 3,4 15,6 SD15-01 COMP TCLP RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 10 3954743 F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 101 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 103 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 91 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 105 3954743 o-Terphenyl % 97 96 99 3954731 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 28 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID: ZX7612 Sample ID: SD15-03 SS2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS TEST SUMMARY Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7613 Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 SS7 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7614 Collected: 2015/03/10 Sample ID: SD15-02 SS2 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7615 Collected: 2015/03/10 Sample ID: SD15-02 SS4 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7616 Collected: 2015/03/10 Sample ID: SD15-02 SS6 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7617 Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 SS2 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Page 29 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: ZX7618 Sample ID: SD15-01 SS4 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7619 Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 SS6 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7695 Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7695 Dup Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 Shipped: 3958108 2015/03/24 Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7696 Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 4,5 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Page 30 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, _SN 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID: ZX7696 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 4,5 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7697 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 6,7 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7698 Sample ID: SD15-02 COMP 1,2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Collected: 2015/03/10 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Page 31 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID: ZX7699 Sample ID: SD15-02 COMP 3,4 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/10 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7700 Sample ID: SD15-02 COMP 5,6 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/10 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7701 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 1,2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk Page 32 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: ZX7701 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 1,2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7702 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 3,4 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7702 Dup Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 3,4 Shipped: ICP Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst 2015/03/24 MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 Maxxam ID: ZX7703 Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 5,6 Shipped: Viviana Canzonieri Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst BAL Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Page 33 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID: ZX7707 Sample ID: TCLP Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description TEST SUMMARY Instrumentation Batch Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Semivolatile Organic Compounds (TCLP) GC/MS 3957417 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Wendy Zhao Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Mercury (TCLP Leachable) (mg/L) CV/AA 3957822 N/A 2015/03/24 Ron Morrison Total Metals in TCLP Leachate by ICPMS ICP1/MS 3958225 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Prempal Bhatti MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Polychlorinated Biphenyl in Leachate GC/ECD 3956218 2015/03/21 2015/03/21 Sarah Huang TCLP - %Solids BAL 3956224 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Jian (Ken) Wang TCLP - Extraction Fluid 3956225 N/A 2015/03/21 Jian (Ken) Wang TCLP - Initial and final pH PH 3956226 N/A 2015/03/21 Jian (Ken) Wang TCLP Zero Headspace Extraction 3955609 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Walt Wang VOCs in ZHE Leachates GC/MS 3956961 2015/03/23 2015/03/23 John Wu Page 34 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -SN 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 GENERAL COMMENTS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt Package 1 5.7°C Package 2 6.7°C Package 3 4.0°C Revised Report (07/08/2015): Parameters for metals and OC Pesticides were amended F1/BTEX Analysis: Samples were reported based on wet weight. Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Sample ZX7700-01 : OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limits were raised due to matrix interferences. Results relate only to the items tested. Success Through Science Page 35 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 36 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3954731 o-Terphenyl 2015/03/21 111 30-130 106 30-130 106 % 3954743 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/24 101 60-140 101 60-140 96 % 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/24 91 1 60-140 93 60-140 1 101 % 3954743 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/24 90 30-130 87 30-130 90 % 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/24 105 60-140 104 60-140 108 % 3955180 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 78 50-130 78 50-130 83 % 3955180 Decachlorobipheny) 2015/03/25 107 50-130 96 50-130 110 % 3955279 D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/20 95 50-130 93 50-130 93 % 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) 2015/03/20 87 50-130 82 50-130 82 % 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/20 82 50-130 82 50-130 82 % 3956218 Leachable Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/21 100 30-130 104 30-130 104 % 3956961 Leachable 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/23 101 70-130 102 70-130 100 % 3956961 Leachable D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/23 102 70-130 102 70-130 100 % 3956961 Leachable D8 -Toluene 2015/03/23 98 70-130 98 70-130 98 % 3957417 Leachable 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 2015/03/24 89 10-130 90 10-130 71 % 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorobiphenyl 2015/03/24 79 30-130 82 30-130 66 % 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorophenol 2015/03/24 30 10-130 39 10-130 33 % 3957417 Leachable D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/24 81 30-130 81 30-130 69 % 3957417 Leachable D5 -Nitrobenzene 2015/03/24 85 30-130 87 30-130 72 % 3957417 Leachable D5 -Phenol 2015/03/24 33 10-130 34 10-130 28 % 3954723 Moisture 2015/03/23 8.6 50 3954727 Moisture 2015/03/23 5.2 50 3954731 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80-120 <50 ug/g NC 50 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Benzene 2015/03/24 80 60-140 82 60-140 <0.005 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/24 90 60-140 81 60-140 <0.01 ug/g NC 50 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/24 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/24 99 60-140 94 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 Page 36 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 37 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3954743 o -Xylene 2015/03/24 75 60-140 83 60-140 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 3954743 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/24 72 60-140 78 60-140 <0.04 ug/g NC 50 3954743 1 Toluene 2015/03/24 77 1 60-140 88 60-140 1 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Total Xylenes 2015/03/24 <0.04 ug/g NC 50 3955180 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 76 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aldrin 2015/03/25 76 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g INC 40 3955180 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 75 30-130 73 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 84 30-130 81 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 77 30-130 73 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 77 50-130 68 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 78 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 80 50-130 73 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 85 30-130 83 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 79 30-130 79 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 92 30-130 97 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin 2015/03/25 76 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 78 SO -130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 76 50-130 73 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 74 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 82 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 Page 37 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 38 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 58 50-130 94 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 26(l) 30-130 82 30-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 52 1 50-130 80 50-130 1 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Lindane 2015/03/25 79 50-130 76 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 93 50-130 90 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Mirex 2015/03/25 111 30-130 100 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g INC 50 3955180 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 90 50-130 82 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 78 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 78 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 75 30-130 71 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 87 50-130 78 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 76 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 80 50-130 80 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Toxaphene 2015/03/25 <0.080 ug/g NC 50 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/20 92 50-130 93 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/20 89 50-130 90 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Acenaphthene 2015/03/20 84 50-130 85 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/20 83 SO -130 83 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Anthracene 2015/03/20 88 50-130 87 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/20 96 50-130 87 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/20 94 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/20 87 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/20 89 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/20 94 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Chrysene 2015/03/20 93 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/20 93 SO -130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Fluoranthene 2015/03/20 92 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Fluorene 2015/03/20 85 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/20 101 50-130 98 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 Page 38 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 39 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3955279 Naphthalene 2015/03/20 81 50-130 83 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Phenanthrene 2015/03/20 84 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Pyrene 2015/03/20 92 1 50-130 89 50-130 1 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3956218 Leachable Total PCB 2015/03/21 95 30-130 104 30-130 <3.0 ug/L NC 40 3956961 Leachable 1,1-Dichloroethylene 2015/03/23 98 70-130 98 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 2015/03/23 92 70-130 91 70-130 <0.050 mg/L INC 30 3956961 Leachable 1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/23 95 70-130 94 70-130 <0.050 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 2015/03/23 90 70-130 89 70-130 <0.050 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Benzene 2015/03/23 89 70-130 89 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Carbon Tetrachloride 2015/03/23 95 70-130 95 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Chlorobenzene 2015/03/23 91 70-130 91 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Chloroform 2015/03/23 93 70-130 93 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2- Butanone) 2015/03/23 92 60-140 89 60-140 <1.0 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Methylene Chloride(Dichloromethane) 2015/03/23 103 70-130 103 70-130 <0.20 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Tetrachloroethylene 2015/03/23 97 70-130 97 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Trichloroethylene 2015/03/23 94 70-130 94 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Vinyl Chloride 2015/03/23 84 70-130 84 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3957417 Leachable 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 2015/03/24 94 10-130 96 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4,5 -Trichlorophenol 2015/03/24 86 10-130 91 10-130 <0.50 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4,6 -Trichlorophenol 2015/03/24 87 10-130 91 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dichlorophenol 2015/03/24 80 10-130 85 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 2015/03/24 83 30-130 83 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/24 95 30-130 95 30-130 <0.10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Cresol Total 2015/03/24 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/24 88 30-130 89 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/24 75 30-130 77 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Hexachloroethane 2015/03/24 73 30-130 76 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable m/p-Cresol 2015/03/24 69 10-130 71 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 Page 39 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 40 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3957417 Leachable Nitrobenzene 2015/03/24 90 30-130 93 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable o -Cresol 2015/03/24 80 10-130 82 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Pentachlorophenol 2015/03/24 92 1 30-130 92 30-130 1 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Pyridine 2015/03/24 21 10-130 25 10-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957822 Leachable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/24 106 75-125 98 80-120 <0.0010 mg/L NC 25 <0.0010 mg/L 3958005 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 106 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/24 96 75-125 106 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 105 80-120 <1.0 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/24 NC 7S-125 98 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 2.8 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 100 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/24 98 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/24 96 75-125 99 80-120 <5.0 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 102 80-120 <0.10 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 110 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 5.0 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/24 95 75-125 103 80-120 <0.10 ug/g 5.4 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 6.0 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 104 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 104 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 0.33 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 96 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 103 80-120 <0.050 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/24 101 75-125 104 80-120 <0.50 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/24 NC 7S-125 96 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 0.68 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <50 ug /g 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 104 80-120 <200 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/24 95 75-125 101 80-120 <0.50 ug/g NC 30 Page 40 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 41 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 103 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 96 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 1 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/24 NC 1 75-125 102 80-120 1 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/24 99 75-125 100 80-120 <0.050 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 104 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 102 80-120 <0.050 ug/g 0.018 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 5.3 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 99 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 5.4 30 3958108 Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/24 90 75-125 97 75-125 <0.050 ug/g NC 40 3958224 Chromium (VI) 2015/03/25 67 (2) 7S-125 98 80-120 <0.2 ug/g NC 35 98 80-120 3958225 Leachable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/25 103 75-125 103 75-125 NC 35 <0.20 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/25 NC 75-125 98 75-125 NC 35 <0.20 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Boron (B) 2015/03/25 100 75-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/25 100 75-125 102 75-125 NC 35 <0.050 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/25 98 75-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/25 98 75-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/25 101 7S-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/25 98 7S-125 102 75-125 NC 35 <0.010 mg/L 3958225 1 Leachable Uranium (U) 2015/03/25 100 75-125 99 75-125 <0.010 mg/L Page 41 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QC Batch I Parameter Success Through Sciencee, QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank IRPD Leachate Blank QC Standard Date % QC Limits % QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery Recovery Recovery 3959401 1 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 92 80-120 96 80-120 <10 ug/g 9.5 40 101 80 120 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. Leachate Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the leaching procedure. Used to determine any process contamination. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). (1) The recovery was below the lower control limit. This may represent a low bias in some results for flagged analyte. (2) The matrix spike recovery was below the lower control limit. This may be due in part to the reducing environment of the sample. The matrix spike was reanalyzed to confirm result. Page 42 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaoam A Bureau Veritas Group Company • Maxxam Job #: B548083 Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/08 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Cristina Carriere, Scientific Services vaPra7(EC q: Ewa Pranjic, M.Sc., .Cfiem, Scientific Specialist Paul Rubinato, Analyst, Maxxam Analytics Success Through Science Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 43 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Your C.O.C. #: 505779-02-01, 505779-03-01, 505779-01-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B548083 Received: 2015/03/18, 17:57 Sample Matrix: SEDIMENT # Samples Received: 18 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3567023 Version: 2 - Revision Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Page 1 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Date Date Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Methylnaphthalene Sum 9 N/A 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00301 EPA 8270D m Semivolatile Organic Compounds (TCLP) 1 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00301 EPA 8270D m Hot Water Extractable Boron 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00408 R153 Ana. Prot. 2011 Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC (2) 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 3060/7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil (1) 9 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 OTT SOP -00002 CCME CWS Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil (1) 10 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 OTT SOP -00001 CCME CWS Mercury (TCLP Leachable) (mg/L) 1 N/A 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00453 EPA 7470A m Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Total Metals in TCLP Leachate by ICPMS 1 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00447 EPA 6020A m Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP 9 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 CAM SOP -00408 EPA 6010C m MOISTURE (1) 18 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00445 McKeague 2nd ed 1978 OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB (3) 9 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00307 SW846 8081, 8082 OC Pesticides Summed Parameters 9 N/A 2015/03/23 CAM SOP -00307 EPA 8081/8082 m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 1 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) 8 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270D m Polychlorinated Biphenyl in Leachate 1 2015/03/21 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00309 EPA 8082A m TCLP - %Solids 1 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00401 EPA 1311 Update I m TCLP - Extraction Fluid 1 N/A 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00401 EPA 1311 Update I m TCLP - Initial and final pH 1 N/A 2015/03/21 CAM SOP -00401 EPA 1311 Update I m Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil 9 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 CAM SOP -00454 EPA 351.2 m TCLP Zero Headspace Extraction 1 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 CAM SOP -00430 EPA 1311 m VOCs in ZHE Leachates 1 2015/03/23 2015/03/23 CAM SOP000226 EPA 8260C m Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. Page 1 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Your C.O.C. #: 505779-02-01, 505779-03-01, 505779-01-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B548083 Received: 2015/03/18, 17:57 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/08 Report #: R3567023 Version: 2 - Revision The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for F2 -F4. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) This test was performed by Maxxam Ottawa (2) Soils are reported on a dry weight basis unless otherwise specified. (3) Chlordane ( Total) = Alpha Chlordane + Gamma Chlordane Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Parnian Baber, Project Manager Email: pbaber@maxxam.ca Phone# (905) 817-5700 Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total Cover Pages : 2 Page 2 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3958224 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.12 0.071 0.095 0.071 0.050 3958108 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 250 200 360 100 50 3958005 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 2500 1700 2100 1700 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 13 8.0 9.4 7.8 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 64000 55000 65000 49000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 5.5 4.4 5.4 5.9 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 2.1 1.5 1.9 1.5 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 4.4 2.8 4.7 1.9 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 6600 5200 5700 7700 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 3.7 2.8 3.2 2.4 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 3.9 2.7 3.4 2.2 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 12000 8200 12000 9000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 240 160 230 150 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 4.4 3.2 3.7 2.4 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 590 400 480 640 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 390 290 370 240 200 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 90 64 83 64 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 78 69 80 57 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 1 0.34 0.25 1 0.27 0.32 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 11 8.6 18.2 16 5.0 1 3958029 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 20 13 15 13 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958029 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 4 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 ZX7702 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 SD15-01 COMP 1,2 SD15-01 COMP 3,4 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 3958224 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.089 0.39 <0.050 0.090 0.050 3958108 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 180 1000 100 120 50 3958005 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 2000 7600 1800 2000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g <1.0 3.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 9.6 45 8.9 10 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 0.37 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 6.7 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 0.18 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 52000 90000 50000 53000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 5.3 12 4.1 4.8 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 1.8 5.8 1.6 1.5 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 2.8 16 2.0 2.4 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 6300 16000 5300 5300 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 2.6 11 2.4 2.6 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 2.7 12 2.5 2.7 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 9300 19000 9000 9000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 180 580 160 170 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 1 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 3.1 12 2.6 2.6 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 510 790 450 440 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 310 1100 280 320 200 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 68 140 58 66 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 65 120 59 65 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 0.10 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 0.27 0.49 0.23 0.24 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 11 20 9.1 9.1 5.0 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 5 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 ZX7702 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP SD15-01 COMP 5,6 1,2 SD15-01 COMP 3,4 RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 15 48 14 1 16 1 5.0 1 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) ug/g <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 1 <0.050 10.0501 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 6 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 Units SD15-5 6COMP RDL QC Batch Inorganics Chromium (VI) ug/g <0.2 0.2 3958224 Metals Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) ug/g 0.22 0.050 3958108 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) ug/g 270 50 3958005 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) ug/g 3400 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) ug/g 1.2 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) ug/g 20 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) ug/g <1.0 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) ug/g <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) ug/g <0.10 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) ug/g 53000 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) ug/g 6.6 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) ug/g 2.4 0.10 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) ug/g 5.1 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) ug/g 7300 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) ug/g 4.7 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) ug/g 4.6 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) ug/g 9800 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) ug/g 240 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) ug/g <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) ug/g 4.5 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) ug/g 530 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) ug/g 480 200 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) ug/g <0.50 0.50 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) ug/g <0.20 0.20 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) ug/g 71 50 3958029 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) ug/g 65 1.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) ug/g <0.050 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) ug/g <5.0 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) ug/g 1 0.27 0.050 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) ug/g 11 5.0 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 7 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS CCME METALS PACKAGE (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 Units SD15-5 6COMP RDL QC Batch Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) ug/g 23 5.0 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) I ug/g 1 <0.050 0.050 3958029 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 8 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0053 0.0064 0.0027 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0024 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0053 0.0040 0.0027 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 9 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/9 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 71 80 81 79 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 82 97 98 93 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 10 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 RDL SD15-02 COMP 5,6 RDL SD15-01 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g 0.0028 0.0020 0.035 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor + Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0028 0.0020 0.013 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.0026 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.0049 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 0.015 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g 0.0028 0.0020 0.013 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g 1 <0.0020 0.0020 0.0026 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 11 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 RDL SMS -02 COMP 5,6 RDL SD15-01 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.020 0.020 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0030 0.0030 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyreneug/g I <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 0.080 <0.080 0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 80 64 75 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 95 115 92 3955180 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 12 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX7702 ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-01 COMP 3,4 SD15-01 COMP 5,6 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Aldrin + Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Chlordane (Total) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 DDT+ Metabolites ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Heptachlor+ Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDD + p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDE + p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 o,p-DDT + p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total Endosulfan ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3954158 Total PCB ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3954158 Pesticides & Herbicides Aldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 a -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 g -Chlordane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDD ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDE ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 o,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 p,p-DDT ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Dieldrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Lindane ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endosulfan II ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Hexachloroethane ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.00501 3955180 Methoxychlor ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Aroclor 1016 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1221 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1232 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 13 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 OC PESTICIDES (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX7702 ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-01 COMP 3,4 SD15-01 COMP 5,6 RDL QC Batch Aroclor 1242 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1248 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1254 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1260 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1262 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 Aroclor 1268 ug/g <0.015 <0.015 0.015 3955180 alpha -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 beta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 delta -BHC ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentad iene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin aldehyde ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Endrin ketone ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Mirex ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Octachlorostyrene ug/g <0.0020 <0.0020 0.0020 3955180 Toxaphene ug/g <0.080 <0.080 0.080 3955180 Surrogate Recovery(%) 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene % 74 80 3955180 Decachlorobiphenyl % 90 105 3955180 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 14 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 ZX7698 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 QC Batch SD15-03 COMP 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 3953360 <0.0071 <0.0071 1 0.0071 0.0071 3954282 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.012 3955279 0.0062 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.012 3955279 0.0057 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.00501 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.019 3955279 0.010 0.0060 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g 0.0079 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0057 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g 0.012 3955279 0.0077 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.032 3955279 0.020 0.012 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/g 0.0091 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 3955279 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.019 3955279 0.011 0.0080 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g 0.025 3955279 0.017 0.010 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 95 3955279 94 96 91 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 86 3955279 85 87 82 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 83 3955279 81 84 77 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 15 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 ZX7702 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 SD15-01 COMP 1,2 SD15-01 COMP 3,4 RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 0.016 <0.0071 <0.0071 0.0071 3954282 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0083 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g 0.0065 0.037 <0.0050 0.0065 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g 0.0055 0.042 <0.0050 0.0071 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0082 0.067 <0.0050 0.0092 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 0.033 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.023 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 0.041 <0.0050 0.0071 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anth race ne ug/g <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.015 0.095 <0.0050 0.016 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0071 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyre ne ug/g <0.0050 0.037 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0059 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.010 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g 0.0055 0.048 <0.0050 0.0082 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g 0.011 0.076 <0.0050 0.013 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery(%) D10 -Anthracene % 93 95 96 96 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 82 85 85 85 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 80 81 82 81 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 16 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 153 PAHS (SOIL) Maxxam ID ZX7703 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 Units SD15-061COMP RDL QC Batch Calculated Parameters Methylnaphthalene, 2-(1-) ug/g <0.0071 0.0071 3954282 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Acenaphthylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/g I <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/g 0.0068 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Chrysene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anth race ne ug/g 1 <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Fluoranthene ug/g 0.011 0.0050 3955279 Fluorene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyre ne ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Naphthalene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Phenanthrene ug/g <0.0050 0.0050 3955279 Pyrene ug/g 0.0084 0.0050 3955279 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 97 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 87 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 83 3955279 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 17 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP VOLATILE ORGANICS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Charge/Prep Analysis Amount Extracted (Wet Weight) (g) N/A 1 25 1 N/A 3955609 Volatile Organics Leachable Benzene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Carbon Tetrachloride mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Chlorobenzene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Chloroform mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene mg/L <0.050 0.050 3956961 Leachable 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene mg/L <0.050 0.050 3956961 Leachable 1,2-Dichloroethane mg/L <0.050 0.050 3956961 Leachable 1,1-Dichloroethylene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Methylene Chloride(Dichloromethane) mg/L <0.20 0.20 3956961 Leachable Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2-Butanone) mg/L. <1.0 1.0 3956961 Leachable Tetrachloroethylene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Trichloroethylene mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Leachable Vinyl Chloride mg/L <0.020 0.020 3956961 Surrogate Recovery (%) Leachable 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 100 3956961 Leachable D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 100 3956961 Leachable D8 -Toluene % 97 3956961 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch N/A = Not Applicable Success Through Science Page 18 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP LEACHATE PREPARATION (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Inorganics Final pH pH 6.11 3956226 Initial pH pH 9.25 3956226 TCLP - % Solids % 100 0.2 3956224 TCLP Extraction Fluid N/A FLUID 1 3956225 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 19 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP METALS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Metals Leachable Mercury (Hg) mg/L <0.0010 0.0010 3957822 Leachable Arsenic (As) mg/L <0.20 0.20 3958225 Leachable Barium (Ba) mg/L <0.20 0.20 3958225 Leachable Boron (B) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Cadmium (Cd) mg/L <0.050 0.050 1 3958225 Leachable Chromium (Cr) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Lead (Pb) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Selenium (Se) mg/L <0.10 0.10 3958225 Leachable Silver (Ag) mg/L <0.010 0.010 3958225 Leachable Uranium (U) mg/L <0.010 0.010 3958225 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 20 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP PCBS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch PCBs Leachable Total PCB ug/L <3.0 3.0 3956218 Surrogate Recovery I(%) Leachable Decachlorobiphenyl % 91 3956218 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 21 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS O.REG 558 TCLP SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS (SEDIMENT) Maxxam ID ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-01-01 Units TCLP RDL QC Batch Semivolatile Organics Leachable Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L <0.10 0.10 3957417 Leachable m/p-Cresol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable o -Cresol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable Cresol Total ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dichlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dinitrotoluene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Hexachloroethane ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Nitrobenzene ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable Pentachlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable Pyridine ug/L <10 10 3957417 Leachable 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Leachable 2,4,5 -Trichlorophenol ug/L <0.50 0.50 3957417 Leachable 2,4,6 -Trichlorophenol ug/L <2.5 2.5 3957417 Surrogate Recovery (%) Leachable 2,4,6-Tribromophenol % 64 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorobiphenyl % 53 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorophenol % 34 3957417 Leachable D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 67 3957417 Leachable D5 -Nitrobenzene % 65 3957417 Leachable D5 -Phenol % 25 3957417 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Success Through Science Page 22 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7612 ZX7613 ZX7614 ZX7615 ZX7616 ZX7617 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 Units SD15-03 SS2 SD15-03 SS7 SD15-02 SS2 SD15-02 SS4 SD15-02 SS6 SD15-01 SS2 RDL QC Batch Inorganics 16 27 0.2 1 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 85 Moisture % <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 <0.2 0.2 1 3954723 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch 1,2,3 RDL QC Batch Maxxam ID ZX7618 ZX7619 ZX7695 ZX7695 ZX7696 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 505779-03-01 Units COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Moisture % 11 SD15-03 COMP 16 27 0.2 1 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 85 SD15-03 COMP 267 SD15-03 COMP 1 10 13959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Units SD15-01 SS4 SD15-01 SS6 1,2,3 RDL QC Batch 1,2,3 Lab-Dup 4,5 Inorganics Moisture % <0.2 <0.2 24 19 0.2 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 510 464 136 10 3959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Maxxam ID ZX7697 ZX7698 ZX7699 ZX7700 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-03 COMP 6,7 SD15-02 COMP 1,2 SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 RDL QC Batch Inorganics Moisture % 11 20 16 27 0.2 1 3954723 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 85 85 267 1 776 1 10 13959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 23 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF SEDIMENT Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7701 ZX7702 ZX7702 ZX7703 ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-01-01 SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP SD15-01 COMP Units 3,4 TCLP RDL QC Batch 1,2 3,4 Lab-Dup 5,6 Inorganics Moisture % 19 19 20 15 18 0.2 3954727 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ug/g 82 157 72 10 3959401 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 24 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7612 ZX7613 ZX7614 ZX7615 ZX7616 ZX7617 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 Units SD15-03 SS2 SD15-03 SS7 SD15-02 SS2 SD15-02 SS4 SD15-02 SS6 SD15-01 SS2 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954743 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 97 99 97 98 97 97 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 97 100 104 98 95 96 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 80 80 80 79 76 83 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 104 101 100 102 102 102 3954743 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 25 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7618 ZX7619 ZX7695 ZX7696 ZX7697 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-02-01 505779-02-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-01 SS4 SD15-01 SS6 SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 SD15-03 COMP 1 4,5 SD15-03 COMP 1 6,7 RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 <10 10 3954743 F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 102 97 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 93 90 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 85 76 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 106 102 3954743 o-Terphenyl % 98 100 93 3954731 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 26 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7698 ZX7699 ZX7700 ZX7701 Sampling Date 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/10 2015/03/11 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 Units SD15-02 COMP 1,2 SD15-02 COMP 3,4 SD15-02 COMP 5,6 SD15-01 COMP 1,2 RDL QC Batch F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 11 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) o-Terphenyl % 100 96 95 101 3954731 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 27 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (CCME) Success Through Science Maxxam ID ZX7702 ZX7703 ZX7707 Sampling Date 2015/03/11 2015/03/11 2015/03/09 COC Number 505779-03-01 505779-03-01 505779-01-01 Units SD15-01 COMP 3,4 15,6 SD15-01 COMP TCLP RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/g <0.005 0.005 3954743 Toluene ug/g <0.02 0.02 3954743 Ethylbenzene ug/g <0.01 0.01 3954743 o -Xylene ug/g <0.02 0.02 3954743 p+m-Xylene ug/g <0.04 0.04 3954743 Total Xylenes ug/g <0.04 0.04 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/g <10 10 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/g <10 10 3954743 F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/g <10 <10 <10 10 3954731 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/g Yes Yes Yes 3954731 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 101 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 103 3954743 D10-Ethylbenzene % 91 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 105 3954743 o-Terphenyl % 97 96 99 3954731 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 28 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID: ZX7612 Sample ID: SD15-03 SS2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS TEST SUMMARY Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7613 Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 SS7 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7614 Collected: 2015/03/10 Sample ID: SD15-02 SS2 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7615 Collected: 2015/03/10 Sample ID: SD15-02 SS4 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7616 Collected: 2015/03/10 Sample ID: SD15-02 SS6 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7617 Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 SS2 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Page 29 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: ZX7618 Sample ID: SD15-01 SS4 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7619 Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 SS6 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7695 Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3953360 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7695 Dup Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 1,2,3 Shipped: 3958108 2015/03/24 Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Arezoo Habibagahi Maxxam ID: ZX7696 Collected: 2015/03/09 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 4,5 Shipped: Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Page 30 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, _SN 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID: ZX7696 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 4,5 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7697 Sample ID: SD15-03 COMP 6,7 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7698 Sample ID: SD15-02 COMP 1,2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Collected: 2015/03/10 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analvst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Page 31 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Maxxam ID: ZX7699 Sample ID: SD15-02 COMP 3,4 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/10 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7700 Sample ID: SD15-02 COMP 5,6 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/10 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954723 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7701 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 1,2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk Page 32 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: ZX7701 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 1,2 Matrix: SEDIMENT Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7702 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 3,4 Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/03/11 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Analyst Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: ZX7702 Dup Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 3,4 Shipped: ICP Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst 2015/03/24 MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 Maxxam ID: ZX7703 Collected: 2015/03/11 Sample ID: SD15-01 COMP 5,6 Shipped: Viviana Canzonieri Matrix: SEDIMENT Received: 2015/03/18 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst BAL Methylnaphthalene Sum CALC 3954282 N/A 2015/03/24 Automated Statchk Hot Water Extractable Boron ICP 3958108 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Jolly John Hexavalent Chromium in Soil by IC IC/SPEC 3958224 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Strong Acid Leachable Metals by ICPMS ICP/MS 3958029 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Viviana Canzonieri Acid Extractable Metals Analysis by ICP ICP 3958005 2015/03/24 2015/03/24 Azita Fazaeli MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi OC Pesticides (Selected) & PCB GC/ECD 3955180 2015/03/20 2015/03/25 Farahnaz Somwaru OC Pesticides Summed Parameters CALC 3954158 N/A 2015/03/23 Automated Statchk PAH Compounds in Soil by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 3955279 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Darryl Tiller Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen - Soil KONE 3959401 2015/03/25 2015/03/25 Rajni Tyagi Page 33 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 Maxxam ID: ZX7707 Sample ID: TCLP Matrix: SEDIMENT Test Description TEST SUMMARY Instrumentation Batch Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Science Collected: 2015/03/09 Shipped: Received: 2015/03/18 Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Semivolatile Organic Compounds (TCLP) GC/MS 3957417 2015/03/23 2015/03/24 Wendy Zhao Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Soil HSGC/MSFD 3954743 2015/03/20 2015/03/24 Liliana Gaburici Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Soil GC/FID 3954731 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Arezoo Habibagahi Mercury (TCLP Leachable) (mg/L) CV/AA 3957822 N/A 2015/03/24 Ron Morrison Total Metals in TCLP Leachate by ICPMS ICP1/MS 3958225 2015/03/24 2015/03/25 Prempal Bhatti MOISTURE BAL 3954727 N/A 2015/03/23 Arezoo Habibagahi Polychlorinated Biphenyl in Leachate GC/ECD 3956218 2015/03/21 2015/03/21 Sarah Huang TCLP - %Solids BAL 3956224 2015/03/20 2015/03/21 Jian (Ken) Wang TCLP - Extraction Fluid 3956225 N/A 2015/03/21 Jian (Ken) Wang TCLP - Initial and final pH PH 3956226 N/A 2015/03/21 Jian (Ken) Wang TCLP Zero Headspace Extraction 3955609 2015/03/20 2015/03/20 Walt Wang VOCs in ZHE Leachates GC/MS 3956961 2015/03/23 2015/03/23 John Wu Page 34 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -SN 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •o- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 GENERAL COMMENTS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt Package 1 5.7°C Package 2 6.7°C Package 3 4.0°C Revised Report (07/08/2015): Parameters for metals and OC Pesticides were amended F1/BTEX Analysis: Samples were reported based on wet weight. Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Sample ZX7700-01 : OC Pesticide Analysis: Detection limits were raised due to matrix interferences. Results relate only to the items tested. Success Through Science Page 35 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 36 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3954731 o-Terphenyl 2015/03/21 111 30-130 106 30-130 106 % 3954743 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/03/24 101 60-140 101 60-140 96 % 3954743 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/24 91 1 60-140 93 60-140 1 101 % 3954743 D10 -Ethyl benzene 2015/03/24 90 30-130 87 30-130 90 % 3954743 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/24 105 60-140 104 60-140 108 % 3955180 2,4,5,6-Tetrachloro-m-xylene 2015/03/25 78 50-130 78 50-130 83 % 3955180 Decachlorobipheny) 2015/03/25 107 50-130 96 50-130 110 % 3955279 D10 -Anthracene 2015/03/20 95 50-130 93 50-130 93 % 3955279 D14-Terphenyl(FS) 2015/03/20 87 50-130 82 50-130 82 % 3955279 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/03/20 82 50-130 82 50-130 82 % 3956218 Leachable Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/03/21 100 30-130 104 30-130 104 % 3956961 Leachable 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/03/23 101 70-130 102 70-130 100 % 3956961 Leachable D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/23 102 70-130 102 70-130 100 % 3956961 Leachable D8 -Toluene 2015/03/23 98 70-130 98 70-130 98 % 3957417 Leachable 2,4,6-Tribromophenol 2015/03/24 89 10-130 90 10-130 71 % 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorobiphenyl 2015/03/24 79 30-130 82 30-130 66 % 3957417 Leachable 2-Fluorophenol 2015/03/24 30 10-130 39 10-130 33 % 3957417 Leachable D14-Terphenyl (FS) 2015/03/24 81 30-130 81 30-130 69 % 3957417 Leachable D5 -Nitrobenzene 2015/03/24 85 30-130 87 30-130 72 % 3957417 Leachable D5 -Phenol 2015/03/24 33 10-130 34 10-130 28 % 3954723 Moisture 2015/03/23 8.6 50 3954727 Moisture 2015/03/23 5.2 50 3954731 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954731 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80-120 <50 ug/g NC 50 3954731 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/03/21 96 50-130 90 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Benzene 2015/03/24 80 60-140 82 60-140 <0.005 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Ethylbenzene 2015/03/24 90 60-140 81 60-140 <0.01 ug/g NC 50 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/03/24 <10 ug/g NC 50 3954743 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/03/24 99 60-140 94 80-120 <10 ug/g NC 50 Page 36 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 37 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3954743 o -Xylene 2015/03/24 75 60-140 83 60-140 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 3954743 p+m-Xylene 2015/03/24 72 60-140 78 60-140 <0.04 ug/g NC 50 3954743 1 Toluene 2015/03/24 77 1 60-140 88 60-140 1 <0.02 ug/g NC 50 3954743 Total Xylenes 2015/03/24 <0.04 ug/g NC 50 3955180 a -Chlordane 2015/03/25 76 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aldrin 2015/03/25 76 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g INC 40 3955180 alpha -BHC 2015/03/25 75 30-130 73 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Aroclor 1016 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1221 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1232 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1242 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1248 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1254 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1260 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1262 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Aroclor 1268 2015/03/25 <0.015 ug/g NC 40 3955180 beta -BHC 2015/03/25 84 30-130 81 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 delta -BHC 2015/03/25 77 30-130 73 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Dieldrin 2015/03/25 77 50-130 68 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan I (alpha) 2015/03/25 78 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan II 2015/03/25 80 50-130 73 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/03/25 85 30-130 83 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin aldehyde 2015/03/25 79 30-130 79 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin ketone 2015/03/25 92 30-130 97 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Endrin 2015/03/25 76 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 g -Chlordane 2015/03/25 78 SO -130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/03/25 76 50-130 73 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Heptachlor 2015/03/25 74 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/25 82 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 Page 37 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 38 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3955180 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/25 58 50-130 94 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/03/25 26(l) 30-130 82 30-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 50 3955180 Hexachloroethane 2015/03/25 52 1 50-130 80 50-130 1 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Lindane 2015/03/25 79 50-130 76 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Methoxychlor 2015/03/25 93 50-130 90 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Mirex 2015/03/25 111 30-130 100 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g INC 50 3955180 o,p-DDD 2015/03/25 90 50-130 82 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 o,p-DDE 2015/03/25 78 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 o,p-DDT 2015/03/25 78 50-130 74 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Octachlorostyrene 2015/03/25 75 30-130 71 30-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 50 3955180 p,p-DDD 2015/03/25 87 50-130 78 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 p,p-DDE 2015/03/25 76 50-130 75 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 p,p-DDT 2015/03/25 80 50-130 80 50-130 <0.0020 ug/g NC 40 3955180 Toxaphene 2015/03/25 <0.080 ug/g NC 50 3955279 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/20 92 50-130 93 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/03/20 89 50-130 90 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Acenaphthene 2015/03/20 84 50-130 85 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Acenaphthylene 2015/03/20 83 SO -130 83 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Anthracene 2015/03/20 88 50-130 87 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/03/20 96 50-130 87 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/20 94 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/03/20 87 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/03/20 89 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/03/20 94 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Chrysene 2015/03/20 93 50-130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/03/20 93 SO -130 91 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Fluoranthene 2015/03/20 92 50-130 88 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Fluorene 2015/03/20 85 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/03/20 101 50-130 98 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 Page 38 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 39 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3955279 Naphthalene 2015/03/20 81 50-130 83 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Phenanthrene 2015/03/20 84 50-130 84 50-130 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3955279 Pyrene 2015/03/20 92 1 50-130 89 50-130 1 <0.0050 ug/g NC 40 3956218 Leachable Total PCB 2015/03/21 95 30-130 104 30-130 <3.0 ug/L NC 40 3956961 Leachable 1,1-Dichloroethylene 2015/03/23 98 70-130 98 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable 1,2 -Dichlorobenzene 2015/03/23 92 70-130 91 70-130 <0.050 mg/L INC 30 3956961 Leachable 1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/03/23 95 70-130 94 70-130 <0.050 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable 1,4 -Dichlorobenzene 2015/03/23 90 70-130 89 70-130 <0.050 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Benzene 2015/03/23 89 70-130 89 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Carbon Tetrachloride 2015/03/23 95 70-130 95 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Chlorobenzene 2015/03/23 91 70-130 91 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Chloroform 2015/03/23 93 70-130 93 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Methyl Ethyl Ketone (2- Butanone) 2015/03/23 92 60-140 89 60-140 <1.0 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Methylene Chloride(Dichloromethane) 2015/03/23 103 70-130 103 70-130 <0.20 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Tetrachloroethylene 2015/03/23 97 70-130 97 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Trichloroethylene 2015/03/23 94 70-130 94 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3956961 Leachable Vinyl Chloride 2015/03/23 84 70-130 84 70-130 <0.020 mg/L NC 30 3957417 Leachable 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 2015/03/24 94 10-130 96 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4,5 -Trichlorophenol 2015/03/24 86 10-130 91 10-130 <0.50 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4,6 -Trichlorophenol 2015/03/24 87 10-130 91 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dichlorophenol 2015/03/24 80 10-130 85 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 2015/03/24 83 30-130 83 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/03/24 95 30-130 95 30-130 <0.10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Cresol Total 2015/03/24 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobenzene 2015/03/24 88 30-130 89 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/03/24 75 30-130 77 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Hexachloroethane 2015/03/24 73 30-130 76 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable m/p-Cresol 2015/03/24 69 10-130 71 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 Page 39 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 40 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3957417 Leachable Nitrobenzene 2015/03/24 90 30-130 93 30-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable o -Cresol 2015/03/24 80 10-130 82 10-130 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Pentachlorophenol 2015/03/24 92 1 30-130 92 30-130 1 <2.5 ug/L NC 40 3957417 Leachable Pyridine 2015/03/24 21 10-130 25 10-130 <10 ug/L NC 40 3957822 Leachable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/24 106 75-125 98 80-120 <0.0010 mg/L NC 25 <0.0010 mg/L 3958005 Acid Extractable Sulphur (S) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 106 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Aluminum (AI) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Antimony (Sb) 2015/03/24 96 75-125 106 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 105 80-120 <1.0 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/24 NC 7S-125 98 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 2.8 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Beryllium (Be) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 100 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Bismuth (Bi) 2015/03/24 98 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Boron (B) 2015/03/24 96 75-125 99 80-120 <5.0 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 102 80-120 <0.10 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Calcium (Ca) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 110 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 5.0 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Cobalt (Co) 2015/03/24 95 75-125 103 80-120 <0.10 ug/g 5.4 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Copper (Cu) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 6.0 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Iron (Fe) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 104 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 104 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 0.33 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Lithium (Li) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Magnesium (Mg) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 96 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Manganese (Mn) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 101 80-120 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Mercury (Hg) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 103 80-120 <0.050 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/03/24 101 75-125 104 80-120 <0.50 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Nickel (Ni) 2015/03/24 NC 7S-125 96 80-120 <0.50 ug/g 0.68 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Phosphorus (P) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <50 ug /g 3958029 Acid Extractable Potassium (K) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 104 80-120 <200 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/24 95 75-125 101 80-120 <0.50 ug/g NC 30 Page 40 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company "0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Success Through Sciencee, Page 41 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD Leachate Blank QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery 3958029 Acid Extractable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/24 100 75-125 103 80-120 <0.20 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Sodium (Na) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 96 80-120 <50 ug/g 3958029 1 Acid Extractable Strontium (Sr) 2015/03/24 NC 1 75-125 102 80-120 1 <1.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Thallium (TI) 2015/03/24 99 75-125 100 80-120 <0.050 ug/g NC 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Tin (Sn) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 104 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 3958029 Acid Extractable Uranium (U) 2015/03/24 102 75-125 102 80-120 <0.050 ug/g 0.018 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Vanadium (V) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 103 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 5.3 30 3958029 Acid Extractable Zinc (Zn) 2015/03/24 NC 75-125 99 80-120 <5.0 ug/g 5.4 30 3958108 Hot Water Ext. Boron (B) 2015/03/24 90 75-125 97 75-125 <0.050 ug/g NC 40 3958224 Chromium (VI) 2015/03/25 67 (2) 7S-125 98 80-120 <0.2 ug/g NC 35 98 80-120 3958225 Leachable Arsenic (As) 2015/03/25 103 75-125 103 75-125 NC 35 <0.20 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Barium (Ba) 2015/03/25 NC 75-125 98 75-125 NC 35 <0.20 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Boron (B) 2015/03/25 100 75-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Cadmium (Cd) 2015/03/25 100 75-125 102 75-125 NC 35 <0.050 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Chromium (Cr) 2015/03/25 98 75-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Lead (Pb) 2015/03/25 98 75-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Selenium (Se) 2015/03/25 101 7S-125 99 75-125 NC 35 <0.10 mg/L 3958225 Leachable Silver (Ag) 2015/03/25 98 7S-125 102 75-125 NC 35 <0.010 mg/L 3958225 1 Leachable Uranium (U) 2015/03/25 100 75-125 99 75-125 <0.010 mg/L Page 41 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/07/08 QC Batch I Parameter Success Through Sciencee, QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank IRPD Leachate Blank QC Standard Date % QC Limits % QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits Value Units % QC Limits Recovery Recovery Recovery 3959401 1 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen 2015/03/25 92 80-120 96 80-120 <10 ug/g 9.5 40 101 80 120 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. Leachate Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the leaching procedure. Used to determine any process contamination. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). (1) The recovery was below the lower control limit. This may represent a low bias in some results for flagged analyte. (2) The matrix spike recovery was below the lower control limit. This may be due in part to the reducing environment of the sample. The matrix spike was reanalyzed to confirm result. Page 42 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaoam A Bureau Veritas Group Company • Maxxam Job #: B548083 Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/08 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: DFO PORT BURWELL Your P.O. #: 1630ONR Sampler Initials: CS VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Cristina Carriere, Scientific Services vaPra7(EC q: Ewa Pranjic, M.Sc., .Cfiem, Scientific Specialist Paul Rubinato, Analyst, Maxxam Analytics Success Through Science Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 43 of 43 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Attention:SUBCONTRACTOR MAXXAM ANALYTICS 32 COLONNADE ROAD UNIT 1000 OTTAWA, ON CANADA K2E7J6 MAXXAM JOB #: B522965 Received: 2015/03/21, 11:00 Sample Matrix: Soil # Samples Received: 1 Analyses Your Project #: B548083 Your C.O.C. #: B548083 Report Date: 2015/03/24 Report #: R1831153 Version: 1 - Final CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS Date Date Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Analytical Method Flash Point 1 N/A 2015/03/24 AB SOP -00062 ASTM D3828-12 A m Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Cynny Hagen, Project Manager Assistant Email: CHagen@maxxam.ca Phone# (403)735-2273 Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total Cover Pages : 1 Page 1 of 5 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Calgary: 2021 - 41st Avenue N.E. T2E 6P2 Telephone (403) 291-3077 Fax (403) 291-9468 Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B522965 Report Date: 2015/03/24 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: B548083 RESULTS OF CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF SOIL Maxxam ID LX6062 Sampling Date 2015/03/09 COC Number 8548083 Units TCLP (ZX7707-04) QC Batch Physical Properties Closed Cup Flash point deg. C >61 (1) 7845617 (1) Sample received past method -specified hold time. Page 2 of 5 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Calgary: 2021- 41st Avenue N.E. TH 6P2 Telephone (403) 291-3077 Fax (403) 291-9468 Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: 8522965 Report Date: 2015/03/24 GENERAL COMMENTS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt Package 1 3.0°C Results relate only to the items tested. MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: 8548083 Page 3 of 5 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Calgary: 2021- 41st Avenue N.E. T2E 6P2 Telephone (403) 291-3077 Fax (403) 291-9468 Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B522965 Report Date: 2015/03/24 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: B548083 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT QA/QC Date Batch Init QC Type Parameter Analyzed Value Recovery Units QC Limits 7845617 RM9 RPD Closed Cup Flash point 2015/03/24 NC % 35 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). Page 4 of 5 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Calgary: 2021 - 41st Avenue N.E. TH 6132 Telephone (403) 291-3077 Fax (403) 291-9468 Max/�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B522965 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Report Date: 2015/03/24 Client Project #: B548083 VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Peng Liang, Senior Analyst Success Through Sciencee, Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 5 of 5 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Calgary: 2021- 41st Avenue N.E. TH 6P2 Telephone (403) 291-3077 Fax (403) 291-9468 Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company 01.1 Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 MAXXAM JOB #: B596463 Received: 2015/05/22, 11:45 Sample Matrix: Water # Samples Received: 5 Analyses Success Through Science Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 514261-01-01 Report Date: 2015/07/10 Report #: R3569911 Version: 3 - Revision CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT Date Date Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Reference Chromium (VI) in Water 5 N/A 2015/05/25 CAM SOP -00436 EPA 7199 m Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water 5 N/A 2015/05/26 CAM SOP -00315 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2-1`4 in Water 1 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 CAM SOP -00316 CCME PHC-CWS m Petroleum Hydrocarbons F2 -F4 in Water 4 2015/05/27 2015/05/28 CAM SOP -00316 CCME PHC-CWS m Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 1 N/A 2015/05/26 CAM SOP SM 2340 B 00102/00408/00447 Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 3 N/A 2015/05/29 CAM SOP SM 2340 B 00102/00408/00447 Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 1 N/A 2015/06/02 CAM SOP SM 2340 B 00102/00408/00447 Mercury (low level) 5 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 CAM SOP -00453 EPA 7470 m PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) 5 2015/05/23 2015/05/23 CAM SOP -00318 EPA 8270 m pH 5 N/A 2015/05/25 CAM SOP -00413 SM 4500H+ B m Subcontracted Analysis (1) 5 N/A 2015/06/02 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water 5 2015/05/25 2015/05/29 CAM SOP -00938 OMOE E3516 m Remarks: Maxxam Analytics has performed all analytical testing herein in accordance with ISO 17025 and the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. All methodologies comply with this document and are validated for use in the laboratory. The methods and techniques employed in this analysis conform to the performance criteria (detection limits, accuracy and precision) as outlined in the Protocol for Analytical Methods Used in the Assessment of Properties under Part XV.1 of the Environmental Protection Act. The CWS PHC methods employed by Maxxam conform to all prescribed elements of the reference method and performance based elements have been validated. All modifications have been validated and proven equivalent following the 'Alberta Environment Draft Addenda to the CWS-PHC, Appendix 6, Validation of Alternate Methods'. Documentation is available upon request. Maxxam has made the following improvements to the CWS-PHC reference benchmark method: (i) Headspace for F1; and, (ii) Mechanical extraction for 1`244. Note: F4G cannot be added to the C6 to C50 hydrocarbons. The extraction date for samples field preserved with methanol for F1 and Volatile Organic Compounds is considered to be the date sampled. Maxxam Analytics is accredited for all specific parameters as required by Ontario Regulation 153/04. Maxxam Analytics is limited in liability to the actual cost of analysis unless otherwise agreed in writing. There is no other warranty expressed or implied. Samples will be retained at Maxxam Analytics for three weeks from receipt of data or as per contract. Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. Page 1 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca MaX20am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Attention:Alicia Wierzbicka Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avenue Suite 400 Ottawa, ON K2C 3G4 Your Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Your C.O.C. #: 514261-01-01 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS - REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B596463 Received: 2015/05/22, 11:45 * RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. (1) This test was performed by Campo to Montreal Subcontract Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Shaun Nowickyj, Customer Service Email: SNowickyj@maxxam.ca Phone# (905)817-5830 Success Through Science Report Date: 2015/07/10 Report #: R3569911 Version: 3 - Revision Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total Cover Pages : 2 Page 2 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 w .maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •� Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF CCME PETROLEUM HYDROCARBONS (WATER) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AHZ739 AHZ740 AHZ741 AHZ742 AHZ743 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 11:05 2015/05/21 10:10 2015/05/21 10:25 2015/05/21 10:35 2015/05/21 10:50 COC Number 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 Units SW15-10 I SW15-12 IQCBatch, SW15-13 IQCBatch, SW15-14 I SW15-15 I RDL QC Batch BTEX & F1 Hydrocarbons Benzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 4036193 Toluene ug/L 0.36 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 4036193 0.40 <0.20 0.20 4036193 Ethylbenzene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 4036193 o -Xylene ug/L <0.20 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 4036193 <0.20 <0.20 0.20 4036193 p+m-Xylene ug/L <0.40 <0.40 4036193 <0.40 4036193 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 4036193 Total Xylenes ug/L <0.40 <0.40 4036193 <0.40 4036193 <0.40 <0.40 0.40 4036193 F1 (C6 -C10) ug/L <25 <25 4036193 <25 4036193 <25 <25 25 4036193 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX ug/L <25 <25 4036193 <25 4036193 <25 <25 25 4036193 F244 Hydrocarbons F2 (CIO -C16 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <100 <100 4039514 <100 4039612 <100 <100 100 4039514 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 4039514 <200 4039612 <200 <200 200 4039514 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) ug/L <200 <200 4039514 <200 4039612 <200 <200 200 4039514 Reached Baseline at C50 ug/L Yes Yes 4039514 Yes 4039612 Yes Yes 4039514 Surrogate Recovery (%) 1,4-Difluorobenzene % 96 106 4036193 108 4036193 93 94 4036193 4-Bromofluorobenzene % 86 107 4036193 127 4036193 101 106 4036193 D10 -Ethyl benzene n% 102 96 4036193 109 4036193 101 95 4036193 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane % 92 82 4036193 82 4036193 75 80 4036193 o-Terphenyl % 100 98 4039514 99 4039612 102 99 4039514 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF RESULTS OF ANALYSES OF WATER Success Through Science Maxxam ID AHZ739 AHZ740 AHZ741 2015/05/21 AHZ742 Sampling Date AHZ743 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 11:05 2015/05/21 10:10 2015/05/21 10:25 514261-01-01 2015/05/21 10:35 2015/05/21 10:50 SW35-15 QC Batch COC Number 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 pH I pH 514261-01-01 QC Batch = Quality Control Batch 514261-01-01 Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Units I SW15-10 I IRDLI SW15-12 I SW15-13 RDL SW15-14 RDL SW15-15 IRDLIQCBatchl Calculated Parameters Hardness (CaCO3) mg/L 240 1.0 120 120 1 1.0 1 170 1 1.0 160 1 1.0 1 4034603 Inorganics Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) mg/L 1 0.50 0.10 0.50(l) 1 0.50(l) 0.50 1.4 1 1.0 0.37 1 0.10 4035862 pH I pH 8.24 N/A 8.08 8.09 1 N/A 1 8.15 1 N/Al 8.22 1 N/A 1 4035045 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch N/A = Not Applicable (1) Detection Limit was raised due to matrix interferences. Maxxam ID AHZ743 2015/05/21 Sampling Date 10:50 COC Number 514261-01-01 Units SW35-15 QC Batch Lab-Dup Inorganics pH I pH 1 8.17 4035045 QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 4 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF ELEMENTS BY ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY (WATER) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AHZ739 AHZ740 AHZ741 AHZ741 AHZ742 AHZ743 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 Sampling Date 11:05 10:10 10:25 10:25 10:35 10:50 COC Number 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 SW15-13 Units SW15-10 SW15-12 SW15-13 SW15-14 SW15-15 RDL QC Batch Lab-Dup Metals Chromium (VI) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 1 <0.50 1 <0.50 0.50 4035432 Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 I <0.01 I <0.01 10.011 4038869 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Lab-Dup = Laboratory Initiated Duplicate Page 5 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •� Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF SEMI -VOLATILE ORGANICS BY GC -MS (WATER) Success Through Science Maxxam ID AHZ739 AHZ740 AHZ741 AHZ742 AHZ743 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 11:05 2015/05/21 10:10 2015/05/21 10:25 2015/05/21 1035 2015/05/21 10:50 COC Number 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 514261-01-01 Units SW15-10 I SW15-12 I SW15-13 I SW15-14 I SW15-15 I RDL I QC Batch Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons Acenaphthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Acenaphthylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Anthracene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Benzo(a)anthracene ug/L 0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Benzo(a)pyrene ug/L 0.015 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene ug/L 0.020 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Benzo(k)fluoranthene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Chrysene ug/L 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 I <0.010 0.010 4034704 Dibenz(a,h)anth racene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Fluoranthene ug/L 0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Fluorene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 1 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 2 -Methylnaphthalene ug/L 0.011 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.0101 4034704 Naphthalene ug/L 0.015 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Phenanthrene ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Pyrene ug/L 0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 4034704 Surrogate Recovery (%) D10 -Anthracene % 95 94 93 93 96 4034704 D14-Terphenyl(FS) % 71 72 72 70 72 4034704 D8 -Acenaphthylene % 82 81 82 82 83 4034704 RDL= Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 6 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam �Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 Maxxam ID: AHZ739 Sample ID: SW15-10 Matrix: Water Test Description Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF TEST SUMMARY Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Success Through Science Collected: 2015/05/21 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/22 Analvst Chromium (VI) in Water IC 4035432 N/A 2015/05/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water HSGC/MSFD 4036193 N/A 2015/05/26 Georgeta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Water GC/FID 4039514 2015/05/27 2015/05/28 Zhiyue (Frank) Zhu Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 4034603 N/A 2015/05/29 Automated Statchk Mercury (low level) CV/AA 4038869 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 Magdalena Carlos PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 4034704 2015/05/23 2015/05/23 Lingyun Feng PH AT 4035045 N/A 2015/05/25 Neil Dassanayake Subcontracted Analysis 4048446 N/A 2015/06/02 Shaun Nowickyj Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water SKAL 4035862 2015/05/25 2015/05/29 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: AHZ740 Sample ID: SW15-12 Matrix: Water Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analvzed Collected: 2015/05/21 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/22 Analvst Chromium (VI) in Water IC 4035432 N/A 2015/05/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water HSGC/MSFD 4036193 N/A 2015/05/26 Georgeta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Water GC/FID 4039514 2015/05/27 2015/05/28 Zhiyue (Frank) Zhu Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 4034603 N/A 2015/05/29 Automated Statchk Mercury (low level) CV/AA 4038869 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 Magdalena Carlos PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 4034704 2015/05/23 2015/05/23 Lingyun Feng pH AT 4035045 N/A 2015/05/25 Neil Dassanayake Subcontracted Analysis 4048446 N/A 2015/06/02 Shaun Nowickyj Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water SKAL 4035862 2015/05/25 2015/05/29 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: AHZ741 Sample ID: SW15-13 Matrix: Water Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Collected: 2015/05/21 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/22 Analyst Chromium (VI) in Water IC 4035432 N/A 2015/05/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water HSGC/MSFD 4036193 N/A 2015/05/26 Georgeta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons F244 in Water GC/FID 4039612 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 Zhiyue (Frank) Zhu Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 4034603 N/A 2015/05/29 Automated Statchk Mercury (low level) CV/AA 4038869 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 Magdalena Carlos PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 4034704 2015/05/23 2015/05/23 Lingyun Feng pH AT 4035045 N/A 2015/05/25 NeilDassanayake Subcontracted Analysis 4048446 N/A 2015/06/02 Shaun Nowickyj Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water SKAL 4035862 2015/05/25 2015/05/29 Rajni Tyagi Page 7 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company '.0- Maxxam �Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 TEST SUMMARY Maxxam ID: AHZ741 Dup Sample ID: SW15-13 Matrix: Water Success Through Science Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Collected: 2015/05/21 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/22 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Chromium (VI) in Water IC 4035432 N/A 2015/05/25 Sally Coughlin Maxxam ID: AHZ742 Collected: 2015/05/21 Sample ID: SW15-14 Shipped: Matrix: Water Received: 2015/05/22 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Chromium (VI) in Water IC 4035432 N/A 2015/05/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water HSGC/MSFD 4036193 N/A 2015/05/26 Georgeta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Water GC/FID 4039514 2015/05/27 2015/05/28 Zhiyue (Frank) Zhu Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 4034603 N/A 2015/06/02 Automated Statchk Mercury (low level) CV/AA 4038869 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 Magdalena Carlos PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 4034704 2015/05/23 2015/05/23 Lingyun Feng pH AT 4035045 N/A 2015/05/25 Neil Dassanayake Subcontracted Analysis 4048446 N/A 2015/06/02 Shaun Nowickyj Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water SKAL 4035862 2015/05/25 2015/05/29 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: AHZ743 Sample ID: SW15-15 Matrix: Water Test Description Collected: 2015/05/21 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/22 Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst Chromium (VI) in Water IC 4035432 N/A 2015/05/25 Sally Coughlin Petroleum Hydro. CCME F1 & BTEX in Water HSGC/MSFD 4036193 N/A 2015/05/26 Georgeta Rusu Petroleum Hydrocarbons 1`244 in Water GC/FID 4039514 2015/05/27 2015/05/28 Zhiyue (Frank) Zhu Hardness (calculated as CaCO3) 4034603 N/A 2015/05/26 Automated Statchk Mercury (low level) CV/AA 4038869 2015/05/27 2015/05/27 Magdalena Carlos PAH Compounds in Water by GC/MS (SIM) GC/MS 4034704 2015/05/23 2015/05/23 Lingyun Feng pH AT 4035045 N/A 2015/05/25 Neil Dassanayake Subcontracted Analysis 4048446 N/A 2015/06/02 Shaun Nowickyj Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen in Water SKAL 4035862 2015/05/25 2015/05/29 Rajni Tyagi Maxxam ID: AHZ743 Dup Sample ID: SW15-15 Matrix: Water Collected: 2015/05/21 Shipped: Received: 2015/05/22 Test Description Instrumentation Batch Extracted Date Analyzed Analyst pH AT 4035045 N/A 2015/05/25 Neil Dassanayake Page 8 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 218 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaam A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0� Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 GENERAL COMMENTS Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt Package 1 1.0°C Package 2 1.0°C Package 3 1.3°C Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Science Revised report on July 10/2015: Client requires a revised report (no VOCs) and BTEX values reported from the hydrocarbon run. Results relate only to the items tested. Page 9 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, -5N 21-8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •.0- Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencee, Page 10 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4034704 D10 -Anthracene 2015/05/23 92 50-130 94 50-130 99 % 4034704 D14-Terphenyl(FS) 2015/05/23 75 50-130 74 50-130 73 % 4034704 D8 -Acenaphthylene 2015/05/23 84 50-130 91 50-130 87 % 4036193 1,4-Difluorobenzene 2015/05/26 97 70-130 98 70-130 102 % 4036193 4-Bromofluorobenzene 2015/05/26 118 70-130 115 70-130 119 % 4036193 D10-Ethylbenzene 2015/05/26 98 70-130 95 70-130 87 % 4036193 D4-1,2-Dichloroethane 2015/05/26 88 70-130 94 70-130 96 % 4039514 o-Terphenyl 2015/05/27 102 60-130 104 60-130 99 % 4039612 o-Terphenyl 2015/05/27 103 60-130 101 60-130 99 % 4034704 1 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/05/23 93 50-130 98 SO -130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 2 -Methylnaphthalene 2015/05/23 88 50-130 95 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Acenaphthene 2015/05/23 90 50-130 96 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Acenaphthylene 2015/05/23 88 50-130 97 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Anthracene 2015/05/23 87 50-130 96 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Benzo(a)anthracene 2015/05/23 101 50-130 105 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Benzo(a)pyrene 2015/05/23 102 50-130 102 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 2015/05/23 102 50-130 103 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 2015/05/23 85 50-130 76 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 2015/05/23 97 50-130 96 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Chrysene 2015/05/23 101 50-130 103 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 2015/05/23 70 50-130 54 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Fluoranthene 2015/05/23 93 50-130 95 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Fluorene 2015/05/23 93 50-130 100 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 2015/05/23 95 50-130 88 50-130 <0.010 ug /L NC 30 4034704 Naphthalene 2015/05/23 84 50-130 89 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Phenanthrene 2015/05/23 85 50-130 88 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4034704 Pyrene 2015/05/23 95 50-130 97 50-130 <0.010 ug/L NC 30 4035045 pH 2015/05/25 102 98-103 0.61 N/A 4035432 Chromium (VI) 2015/05/25 103 80-120 100 80-120 <0.50 ug/L NC 20 4035862 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 2015/05/29 105 80-120 105 80-120 <0.10 mg/L NC 20 103 80-120 4036193 Benzene 2015/05/26 95 70-130 97 70-130 <0.20 ug/L NC 30 Page 10 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •0- Maxxam Job #: B596463 Report Date: 2015/07/10 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) Stantec Consulting Ltd Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF Success Through Sciencee, Page 11 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Matrix Spike Spiked Blank Method Blank RPD QC Standard QC Batch Parameter Date % Recovery QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits Value Units Value (%) QC Limits % Recovery QC Limits 4036193 Ethylbenzene 2015/05/26 115 70-130 115 70-130 <0.20 ug/L NC 30 4036193 F1 (C6 -C10) - BTEX 2015/05/26 <25 ug/L NC 30 4036193 F1 (C6 -C10) 2015/05/26 98 70-130 90 70-130 <25 ug/L NC 30 4036193 o -Xylene 2015/05/26 118 70-130 115 70-130 <0.20 ug/L NC 30 4036193 p+m-Xylene 2015/05/26 107 70-130 107 70-130 <0.40 ug/L NC 30 4036193 Toluene 2015/05/26 101 70-130 101 70-130 <0.20 ug/L NC 30 4036193 Total Xylenes 2015/05/26 <0.40 ug/L NC 30 4038869 Mercury (Hg) 2015/05/27 89 75-125 103 80-120 <0.01 ug/L NC 20 4039514 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/05/28 101 50-130 100 60-130 <100 ug/L NC 30 4039514 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/05/28 98 50-130 102 60-130 <200 ug/L NC 30 4039514 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/05/27 95 50-130 97 60-130 <200 ug/L 4039612 F2 (C10 -C16 Hydrocarbons) 2015/05/28 99 50-130 101 60-130 <100 ug/L NC 30 4039612 F3 (C16 -C34 Hydrocarbons) 2015/05/28 97 50-130 98 60-13 200 ug/L NC 30 4039612 F4 (C34-050 Hydrocarbons) 2015/05/28 92 50-130 93 60-130 <200 ug/L NC 30 N/A = Not Applicable Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. QC Standard: A sample of known concentration prepared by an external agency under stringent conditions. Used as an independent check of method accuracy. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). Page 11 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 21L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca Maaoam A Bureau Veritas Group Company • Maxxam Job #: B596463 Stantec Consulting Ltd Report Date: 2015/07/10 Client Project #: 122511075 Site Location: PORT BURWELL Sampler Initials: MF VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). Cristina Carriere, Scientific Services � Ei=*", va PratllC 9.1 Ewa Pranjic, M.Sc., em, Scientific Specialist Success Through Science Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 12 of 12 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics 6740 Campobello Road, Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Tel: (905) 817-5700 Toll -Free: 800-563-6266 Fax: (905) 817-5777 www.maxxam.ca M c—i X�- c� t -Yl A Bureau Veritas Group Company Your Project #: MB596463 Site Location: 122511075 Your C.O.C. #: 08407483 Attention: SUB CONTRACTOR MAXXAM ANALYTICS CAMPOBELLO 6740 CAMPOBELLO ROAD MISSISSAUGA, ON CANADA L5N 21-8 CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS — REVISED REPORT MAXXAM JOB #: B543306 Received: 2015/05/26, 09:00 Sample Matrix: Water # Samples Received: 5 Success Through Science® Report Date: 2015/07/03 Report #: R1989861 Version: 2R Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Tabitha Rudkin, AScT, Burnaby Project Manager Email: TRudkin@maxxam.ca Phone# (604) 638-2639 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 1 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Max— Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 11<5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 1 of 15 Date Date Analyses Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Analytical Method Hardness Total (calculated as CaCO3) 1 N/A 2015/05/28 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020a R1 m Hardness Total (calculated as CaCO3) 4 N/A 2015/05/29 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020a R1 m Mercury (Total) by CVAF 5 2015/05/29 2015/05/29 BBY7SOP-00015 BCMOE BCLM Oct2013 m Na, K, Ca, Mg, S by CRC ICPMS (total) 1 2015/05/27 2015/05/28 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Na, K, Ca, Mg, S by CRC ICPMS (total) 4 2015/05/27 2015/05/29 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Elements by CRC ICPMS (total) 5 2015/05/28 2015/05/28 BBY7SOP-00002 EPA 6020A R1 m Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Tabitha Rudkin, AScT, Burnaby Project Manager Email: TRudkin@maxxam.ca Phone# (604) 638-2639 -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Total cover pages: 1 Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Max— Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 11<5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 1 of 15 A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B543306 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: MB596463 Site Location: 122511075 CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Success Through Science® Maxxam ID MH7156 MH7156 MH7157 MH7158 Sampling Date mg/L 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 0.50 7914010 Elements 11:05 11:05 10:10 10:25 COC Number ug/L 08407483 08407483 08407483 08407483 0.010 7916641 Total Metals by ICPMS UNITS SWI 5-10 SW15-10 SW15-12 SW15-13 RDL QC Batch Total Aluminum (Al) ug/L (AHZ739-07R) (AHZ739-07R) (AHZ740-07R) (AHZ741-07R) 3.0 7916070 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 Lab -Du <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7916070 Calculated Parameters Total Hardness (CaCO3) mg/L 247 126 128 0.50 7914010 Elements Total Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 0.010 7916641 Total Metals by ICPMS Total Aluminum (Al) ug/L 710 784 296 415 3.0 7916070 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7916070 Total Arsenic (As) ug/L 0.80 0.79 0.62 0.67 0.10 7916070 Total Barium (Ba) ug/L 45.3 47.9 26.2 27.5 1.0 7916070 Total Beryllium (Be) ug/L <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 <0.10 0.10 7916070 Total Bismuth (Bi) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7916070 Total Boron (B) ug/L <50 <50 <50 <50 50 7916070 Total Cadmium (Cd) ug/L 0.010 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.010 7916070 Total Chromium (Cr) ug/L <1.0 1.2 <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7916070 Total Cobalt (Co) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7916070 Total Copper (Cu) ug/L 1.85 1.81 2.07 1.63 0.50 7916070 Total Iron (Fe) ug/L 668 740 304 378 10 7916070 Total Lead (Pb) ug/L 0.56 0.64 0.24 0.34 0.20 7916070 Total Manganese (Mn) ug/L 72.4 73.9 9.8 9.9 1.0 7916070 Total Molybdenum (Mo) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.1 1.1 1.0 7916070 Total Nickel (Ni) ug/L 1.4 1.2 <1.0 1.2 1.0 7916070 Total Phosphorus (P) ug/L 58 56 34 50 10 7916070 Total Selenium (Se) ug/L 0.15 0.17 0.16 0.17 0.10 7916070 Total Silver (Ag) ug/L <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 <0.020 0.020 7916070 Total Strontium (Sr) ug/L 280 298 166 171 1.0 7916070 Total Thallium (TI) ug/L <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7916070 Total Tin (Sn) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7916070 Total Titanium (Ti) ug/L 26.2 25.8 7.6 26.2 5.0 7916070 Total Uranium (U) ug/L 0.73 0.78 0.40 0.41 0.10 7916070 Total Vanadium (V) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7916070 Total Zinc (Zn) ug/L <5.0 (1) <5.0 101 5.1 5.0 7916070 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit ( 1 ) Matrix Spike outside acceptance criteria (10% of analytes failure allowed). Page 2 of 15 A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B543306 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: MB596463 Site Location: 122511075 CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Success Through Scienceo Maxxam ID 75.0 MH7156 MH7156 MH7157 MH7158 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 14.5 Sampling Date 9.23 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 2015/05/21 1.58 1.77 0.050 7914204 11:05 11:05 10:10 10:25 0.050 7914204 COC Number 10.4 08407483 08407483 08407483 08407483 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit UNITS SWI 5-10 SW15-10 SW15-12 SW15-13 RDL QC Batch (AHZ739-07R) (AHZ739-07R) (AHZ740-07R) (AHZ741-07R) Lab -Du Total Calcium (Ca) mg/L 75.0 35.9 36.0 0.050 7914204 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 14.5 8.79 9.23 0.050 7914204 Total Potassium (K) mg/L 2.37 1.58 1.77 0.050 7914204 Total Sodium (Na) mg/L 14.6 9.06 9.44 0.050 7914204 Total Sulphur (S) mg/L 10.4 8.5 4.6 3.0 7914204 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 3 of 15 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B543306 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: MB596463 Site Location: 122511075 CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Maxxam ID MH7159 MH7160 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 10:35 2015/05/21 10:50 COC Number 08407483 08407483 151 UNITS SW15-14 AHZ742-07R SW15-15 RDL QC Batch AHZ743-07R Calculated Parameters Total Hardness (CaCO3) mg/L 171 151 0.50 7914010 Elements Total Mercury (Hg) ug/L <0.010 <0.010 0.010 7916641 Total Metals by ICPMS Total Aluminum (Al) ug/L 792 703 3.0 7916070 Total Antimony (Sb) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7916070 Total Arsenic (As) ug/L 0.90 0.69 0.10 7916070 Total Barium (Ba) ug/L 37.0 33.5 1.0 7916070 Total Beryllium (Be) ug/L <0.10 <0.10 0.10 17916070 Total Bismuth (Bi) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7916070 Total Boron (B) ug/L <50 <50 50 7916070 Total Cadmium (Cd) ug/L 0.027 0.012 0.010 7916070 Total Chromium (Cr) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7916070 Total Cobalt (Co) ug/L <0.50 <0.50 0.50 7916070 Total Copper (Cu) ug/L 2.48 2.44 0.50 7916070 Total Iron (Fe) ug/L 968 863 10 7916070 Total Lead (Pb) ug/L 0.80 0.67 0.20 7916070 Total Manganese (Mn) ug/L 70.4 46.8 1.0 7916070 Total Molybdenum (Mo) ug/L <1.0 <1.0 1.0 7916070 Total Nickel (Ni) ug/L 1.6 1.5 1.0 7916070 Total Phosphorus (P) ug/L 58 40 10 7916070 Total Selenium (Se) ug/L 0.21 0.16 0.10 7916070 Total Silver (Ag) ug/L <0.020 <0.020 0.020 7916070 Total Strontium (Sr) ug/L 212 187 1.0 7916070 Total Thallium (TI) ug/L <0.050 <0.050 0.050 7916070 Total Tin (Sn) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7916070 Total Titanium (Ti) ug/L 20.1 17.6 5.0 7916070 Total Uranium (U) ug/L 0.54 0.48 0.10 7916070 Total Vanadium (V) ug/L <5.0 <5.0 5.0 7916070 Total Zinc (Zn) ug/L 9.3 <5.0 5.0 7916070 Total Calcium (Ca) mg/L 50.1 44.6 10.050 7914204 Total Magnesium (Mg) mg/L 11.1 9.63 0.050 7914204 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 4 of 15 Success Through Science® A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B543306 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: MB596463 Site Location: 122511075 CCME TOTAL METALS IN WATER (WATER) Maxxam ID MH7159 MH7160 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 10:35 2015/05/21 10:50 COC Number 08407483 08407483 UNITS SW15-14 AHZ742-07R SW15-15 RDL QC Batch AHZ743-07R Total Potassium (K) mg/L 2.03 1.77 0.050 7914204 Total Sodium (Na) mg/L 11.2 9.42 0.050 7914204 Total Sulphur (S) mg/L 7.8 8.5 3.0 7914204 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit Page 5 of 15 Success Through Scienceo A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: B543306 Report Date: 2015/07/03 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Client Project #: MB596463 Site Location: 122511075 Package 1 Each temperature is the average of up to three cooler temperatures taken at receipt General Comments Results relate only to the items tested. Page 6 of 15 Success Through Scienceo MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company Quality Assurance Report Maxxam Job Number: VB543306 MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: SUB CONTRACTOR Client Project #: MB596463 P.O. #: Site Location: 122511075 Success Through Sciences QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7916070 GS2 Matrix Spike [MH7156-01] Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/05/28 104 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/05/28 113 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/05/28 104 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/05/28 109 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/05/28 112 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/05/28 103 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/05/28 104 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/05/28 112 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/05/28 103 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/05/28 97 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/05/28 84 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/05/28 98 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/05/28 116 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/05/28 NC % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/05/28 110 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/05/28 121 (1) % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/05/28 113 % 80-120 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/05/28 108 % 80-120 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/05/28 110 % 80-120 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/05/28 107 % 80-120 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/05/28 112 % 80-120 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/05/28 106 % 80-120 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/05/28 112 % 80-120 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/05/28 111 % 80-120 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/05/28 110 % 80-120 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/05/28 110 % 80-120 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/05/28 112 % 80-120 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/05/28 103 % 80-120 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/05/28 118 % 80-120 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/05/28 116 % 80-120 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/05/28 98 % 80-120 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/05/28 108 % 80-120 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/05/28 110 % 80-120 Total Uranium (U) 2015/05/28 109 % 80-120 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/05/28 107 % 80-120 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/05/28 120 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/05/28 <3.0 ug/L Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/05/28 <0.50 ug/L Total Arsenic (As) 2015/05/28 <0.10 ug/L Total Barium (Ba) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/05/28 <0.10 ug/L Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 7 of 15 MSX car-" A Bureau Veritas Group Company MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: SUB CONTRACTOR Client Project #: MB596463 P.O. #: Site Location: 122511075 Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: VB543306 Success Through Science® QA/QC Batch Num Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed /mm/dd Value Recovery UNITS QC Limits 7916070 GS2 Method Blank Total Boron (B) 2015/05/28 <50 ug/L Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/05/28 <0.010 ug/L Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/05/28 <0.50 ug/L Total Copper (Cu) 2015/05/28 <0.50 ug/L Total Iron (Fe) 2015/05/28 <10 ug/L Total Lead (Pb) 2015/05/28 <0.20 ug/L Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Total Phosphorus (P) 2015/05/28 <10 ug/L Total Selenium (Se) 2015/05/28 <0.10 ug/L Total Silver (Ag) 2015/05/28 <0.020 ug/L Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/05/28 <1.0 ug/L Total Thallium (TI) 2015/05/28 <0.050 ug/L Total Tin (Sn) 2015/05/28 <5.0 ug/L Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/05/28 <5.0 ug/L Total Uranium (U) 2015/05/28 <0.10 ug/L Total Vanadium (V) 2015/05/28 <5.0 ug/L Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/05/28 <5.0 ug/L RPD [MH7156-01] Total Aluminum (AI) 2015/05/28 10 % 20 Total Antimony (Sb) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Arsenic (As) 2015/05/28 1.1 % 20 Total Barium (Ba) 2015/05/28 5.6 % 20 Total Beryllium (Be) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Bismuth (Bi) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Boron (B) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Cadmium (Cd) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Chromium (Cr) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Cobalt (Co) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Copper (Cu) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Iron (Fe) 2015/05/28 10 % 20 Total Lead (Pb) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Manganese (Mn) 2015/05/28 2.1 % 20 Total Molybdenum (Mo) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Nickel (Ni) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Phosphorus (P) 2015/05/28 3.5 % 20 Total Selenium (Se) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Silver (Ag) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Strontium (Sr) 2015/05/28 6.4 % 20 Total Thallium (TI) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Tin (Sn) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Titanium (Ti) 2015/05/28 1.7 % 20 Total Uranium (U) 2015/05/28 5.9 % 20 Total Vanadium (V) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 Total Zinc (Zn) 2015/05/28 NC % 20 7916641 EL2 Matrix Spike Total Mercury (Hg) 2015/05/29 92 % 80-120 Spiked Blank Total Mercury (Hg) 2015/05/29 98 % 80-120 Method Blank Total Mercury (Hg) 2015/05/29 <0.010 ug/L RPD Total Mercury H 2015/05/29 NC % 20 Duplicate: Paired analysis of a separate portion of the same sample. Used to evaluate the variance in the measurement. Matrix Spike: A sample to which a known amount of the analyte of interest has been added. Used to evaluate sample matrix interference. Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 8 of 15 A Bureau Veritas Group Company MAXXAM ANALYTICS Attention: SUB CONTRACTOR Client Project #: MB596463 P.O. #: Site Location: 122511075 Quality Assurance Report (Continued) Maxxam Job Number: VB543306 Success Through Scienceo NC (Matrix Spike): The recovery in the matrix spike was not calculated. The relative difference between the concentration in the parent sample and the spiked amount was too small to permit a reliable recovery calculation (matrix spike concentration was less than 2x that of the native sample concentration). NC (Duplicate RPD): The duplicate RPD was not calculated. The concentration in the sample and/or duplicate was too low to permit a reliable RPD calculation (one or both samples < 5x RDL). ( 1 ) Recovery or RPD for this parameter is outside control limits. The overall quality control for this analysis meets acceptability criteria. Maxxam Analytics International Corporation o/a Maxxam Analytics Burnaby: 4606 Canada Way V5G 1K5 Telephone(604) 734-7276 Fax(604) 731-2386 Page 9 of 15 M A Bureau Veritas Group Company Validation Signature Page Maxxam Job #: 6543306 The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). David Huang, Scientific Specialist Rob Reiner[; Data Vali ation Coordinator Success Through Scienceo Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 10 of 15 j1111 $fl1Tj1111 MAXXAM ANALYTICS « 08407483 Page #: 1 6740 Campobello Road Mississauga, Ontario, L5N 2L8 Ma r"Stantec Consulting Ltd - Ottawa Phone: (905) 817--5700 Maxxam PM Shaun Nowiekyj Fax: (905) 817-5777 ?*! SUBCONTRACTING REQUEST FORM To: Campo to Burnaby Subcontract Job## B596463 ❑ Yes No International Samplel] oHazard (if yes, add copy of Mvvemmt Cert., heat treat is required prior to disposal) ❑ Yes ZNo Special Protocol (ifyes, Protocol Sample ID Matrix. Test(s) Required AHZ739-07R 1 SWI -10 W Total ICPMS Metals for COME CEQG i1H & for SW AlIZ,740-07R 1 S W 1-[ W KH7 L�7 AHZ741-07R 1 S W l i- l 3 W -:)Ly AHZ742.-07R 15 W 15-14 W 0_q AHZ743-0781 SW15-15 4i' fA 14�:)'Icop Total ICPMS Metals for COME CEQG for SW Total ICPMS Metals for COME CEQG for SW Total .ICPMS Metals for CCME CEQG for SW Total ICPMS Metals for CC,ME CEQG for SW Container Date Sampled Date Reauired l(M120) 2015/05/21 11.45 2015106101 1(M120) 2015/0512110:10 2015106/01 1(M120) 2015/05/21 10:25 20151176,'01 i(M120) 201.5/05121 1435 2015/06101 1(M ] 20) 2015105121 14;50 201506/01 Receiving Maxxarn Location: Campo to Burnaby Subcontract Relinquished by (Sign) Deceived by (Sign) JOB# 10b_ (Print) —Date and Time (Print) _and Time t Subcontract Comments V1 .L" SLTB-MISC IS FOR LOW LEVEL OC PE-S'TICIDES. REG 153, T?, 20'11. Page 11 of 15 11411i111ilil B543306 Contirstted... Temp. 1 Temp, 2 Temp. 3 Cooler #I jCustody Custody Seal Present E NO ; Seat Intact YES O ]ce Present Upon Receipt NO Cooler #2 Custody Seal Present YESI NO C_ustady Seal Intact YES NO _ Ice Present Upon Receipt YES NO Cooler 93 Custody Scal Present YES NO Custody Seal Intact YES NO ice Present Upon Receipt YE 5 O _ Receiving Maxxarn Location: Campo to Burnaby Subcontract Relinquished by (Sign) Deceived by (Sign) JOB# 10b_ (Print) —Date and Time (Print) _and Time t Subcontract Comments V1 .L" SLTB-MISC IS FOR LOW LEVEL OC PE-S'TICIDES. REG 153, T?, 20'11. Page 11 of 15 11411i111ilil B543306 Contirstted... ReportName: Entry Client: Stantec Consulting Ltd 1331 Clyde Avcnue Suite 400 Ottawa ON K2C 3G4 Job #: B596463 National Client: 518, Stantee Consulting {IYXt} Inv AtLw Accounts Payable Task Order: Line Item: Report- same Attention. Aliicja Wierzbicka Phone: (613) 722 - 4420Ext: Fax: (b 13) 739 - 0721 ENWL: Alicja.Wierzbickar@stantec.com Project Coordinator: SNO Page #: 1 Printed: 2015/05125 Version 2 Reception Dwa 2015105122 Reception Time: 11:45 Login Datc; 2015105122 REQUIRED DATE: 20151106/02,18:00 Quote Number: 848051 ,Accounting Information Report Copies Desc, Code Attention # crap. Fax EMAII. NSD # 1640UNR MEixxam Client Number Sample IWRe:2ort JWSample info A_HZ739-01R SW15-10 SW15-10 AF3Z739-02R SW15-10 SW15-10 AHZ739-03R SW15-10 SW15-10 AHZ739-04R SW15-10 SW15-10 AHZ739-05R SW 15-10 SW15-10 A14Z739-06R SW 15-10 8W15-10 AHZ739-07R SW15-10 SW 15-10 AHZ739-08R S W 15-10 SWI5-10 Aliz739-09R SW15-10 SW15-10 AHZ739-10R SVW15-10 SWi540 AHZ740-b1R SWI5-12 S W 15-12 AHZ740-02R S15-12 S W 15-12 A.HZ740-03R SWI 5-12 SWI5-12 AHZ740-04R SW15-12 W15-12 AHZ740-05R SW15-12 SW 15-12 A14Z740-06R SW 15-12 SW 15-12 ARZ740-07R SWI5-12 SW 15-12 AHZ740-08R SW15-12 SWI 5-12 AH7740-09R SW1.5-12 SW15-12 Sure Recd, Sar phrig Project Number: Cones Cade OK Tate Matrix 2-ORGYNfA-ENV-7 Yos 2015105/21 Rpt Address #: Q.C. Samples: 11:05 2-F24B NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015105/21 W 11:05 2 -FAH NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 11:05 1-0 N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015105/21 W 11:05 1-N N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05121 W 11:05 1 -CF N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05121 W 11:05 I -M120 N/A-EN'v-7 Yes 2015/05121 W 11:05 1-HCIICN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 11:05 3-VOCBN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05121 W 11:05 2-VOCHN/A-ENV-7 Yes 20I5/05/21 W 11:05 2-ORGVN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 10:10 2-F24H N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05121 W 10:10 2 -PAN N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2GI5105I21 W 10:10 I -G N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 10,14 1-N NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 10,10 I -CR NIA -ENV -7 Ycs 2015/0512.1 W 10;14 1-M120N/A-INV-7 Yes 2015/0511 W 10:/0 1-HGHCN/A-rNV-7 Yes 2415/45/21 W 10.10 3-V0(.'DN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 10:10 Page 12 of 15 ?,0, Number: Project Number: 122511075 Site Location: Site #: Port Burwell Client Number: 50098 Rpt Address #: Q.C. Samples: No Test Codes DISP, SUS-MISC F24FID-W PAH-CCME-L HARD -W, ICP-IIARD-L, PH2 TKN'1N-W CR61 C -W STJACCiwtEMFIT HGLO-W C+T-IDCP-W, VOCRSC-W -FIBTEXHS-W DISP, SLTB-MISC F24FID-W PAI I-CCME-L HARD -W, ICI'-IIARD-L, PH2 TKNTN-W CR6IC-W S UBCCMEME`I' HOLO -W C+T-DCP-W, VClCRSC-W Continued... Report Name; Entry Job ft: /3546463 Page #: 2 National Client: 515, Stantec Conmultin SNR} Maxxam Client Number Sample ID/Report ID/ReportIDI am . le Info A4Z740-1 OR SW15-12 SW15-12 AHZ741-01R SW15-13 SW I5-13 A.HZZ741-02R SW15-13 SW15-13 A14Z141-03R SWI 5-13 SW15-13 AHZ741-04R SW15-13 SW15-13 AH,Z741-05R SW 15-13 SW15-13 AHZ741-06R SW15-13 SW15-13 AHZ741-07R SW 15-13 SW 15-.13 AHZ741-08R SWI5-13 SW 15-13 A14Z741-09R SW15-13 SW 15-13 ARZ741-IOR SW15-13 SW 15-13 ARZ742-DIR SW15-14 SW 15-14 AHZ742-02R SW 15-14 SW 15-14 AH7742-03R SW15-14 SW 15-14 AH7-742-04R SW 15-14 SW 15-14 AHZ742-05R SW15-14 SW 15-14 AHZ742-06R SWIS-14 SW15-14 AHZ742-07R SW15-14 SWI 5-14 AHZ742-OSR SW15-14 SW15-14 AHZ742-09R SW15-14 SW 15-14 AHZ742-IOR SW15-14 SW15-14 A142743 -01R SW15-15 SW 15-15 AI1Z743-02R SW 15-15 SW 15-15 A14Z743-03R SW 15-15 SW 15-15 AHZ743-04R SW15-15 W15-15 AHL743-05R SW15-15 SW15-15 AlIZ743-06R SW15-15 SW15-15 AHL743-07R SW 15-15 SW 15-15 AHZ743-08R SWI5-15 SW15-15 Store Recd. Sampling cant's Cada OK hate Matrix 2-VOCENIA-ENV-7 Yes 2015105/21 W" 10:10 2-QR0ViFI1A-ENV-7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:25 2-F2413 NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015105/21 W 10:25 2 -PAH NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:25 1-G NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015{05121 W 10:25 1-1V NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015105/21 W 10:2.5 1 -CR NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:25 1 -M120 NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2€1 1 514 512 1 W 10:25 1-HGHCNIA-ENV-7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:25 3-VOCBN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:2.5 2-VOC 13N/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015105.121 W 10:25 2-ORGVN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05121 W 10:35 2-F24B NIA. -ENV -7 Yes 2015105121 W 1035 2 -PAH N/A -ENV -7 Yes 201510.5121 W 10:35 1-G NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:35 1-N N/A -P -NV -7 Yes 2015105121 W 10..35 I -CR NIA -ENV -7 Yrs 2415145121 W 10:35 i-MI20 NIA -ENV -7 Yes 2415105121 W 14:35 i-KGHCN/A-ENV-7 Yes 201.5/45/21 W 10:35 3-VOCENIA-ENV-7 Yes 2015105/21 W 10.35 2-VC7CBNIA-ENV-7 Yes 2015105/21 W 10:35 2-ORGVNIA-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05/21 W 10:50 2-F24B MIA-FNV-7 Ycs 2015/05121 W 10:54 2-PA14 N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05121 W 10:50 1-G N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05121 W 10:54 1-N N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015145121 W 10.50 I -CR N/A -F -NV -7 Yes 2015105al W 10:50 1-MI20 N/A -ENV -7 Yes 2015/05121 W 10:50 1-HGHCN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015105121 W 10:50 Page 13 of 15 Test Codes -F 1 BTEXHS-W DISP, SUI!-MISC F24FID-VV PAH -COME -L ILAR.D-W, ICP -HARD -1., PI -12 TKNTN-W CR61C-W SLBCCMEMET HGLOQ W C+T-DC'P-W, VOCRSC-W ,F I BTEXH S - DISK, SUB-MISC F24FID-W PAH-CC'ME-L HARD -W, ICP -HART) -I,, P142 TKNTN-W CR61C-W SLIBCCMEMF T HGLO-W C+T-DC.P-W, VOCRSC-W -F 1 DTEXHS-W I)ISP, SUB-NUSC F24FID-W PAH -COME -L HART} -W, ICP -HART] -L, PH2 TKNTt4- W CP,61C-W SUBCCMFMF-T FTGLO-W Continued--- Report Name: Entry Job N: B596463 National Client- 518, Stantec Consulting INR Max.xajrn Client Store Recd. Sampling Numbur Sample ID/Report ID/Sample Info cones Code OK Date Matrix A14Z743-09R SWIS-15 3-VOCBN/A-ENV-7 Yes 201 V05/21 W SW15-15 10:50 AHZ743-IOR SWII-15 2-VGCBN/A-ENV-7 Yes 2015/05/21 W SWIS-15 10:50 Remarks: NReg, COME. PWQO. SUB-MISC is for Low Level CC Pesticides. Reg 153, T?, 2011. Iiispected by: HOL Date: 2015M122 Time: 20;59 Approved by: IGN Da4la41-WO Time: 23:14 Page #: 3 Test Codes C+T-DCP-W, VOCRSC-W -FIBTEXHS-W Date of Sample Disposal. Disposal by: Continued... _ Q"� *' s 39 � _ _ � � . � � i% � —`a• V � ins / _ _ — - __ _ _ — i. � � 3J8 p ��ia� �b prs.krry ✓.ser7 `�� ' gel yia"'�.7 uao4ss�o�iu�N c+c.ti�aE.4 3W �7 .c��awk vn uane+vf�.t wJ�lbpjy M+�41 � � — ._ �� �• a3�19 ila/ k ss ]lSi '�YW J -S A{'11i1v�PW 9FJFJ=}I lfli. �� _ ++RR yy�� W+� BWJ7�i3 RC r p� .�a�M sw IeN .uun..ym.a.;J � r� •� � � .� _� _ � �. -ioa�no msQ�el+dl L.TibJ+Vlf#� iJie�i� � I �.. .v 'm - La .es ET 12 QQ1 —1 _ * u Cl [=] Page 15 of 15 ig 75 Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Attention:Subcontractor MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Mississauga - Ontario 6740 Campobello Rd MISSISSAUGA, ON Canada L5N 21-8 MAXXAM JOB #: B526959 Received: 2015/05/26, 08:20 Sample Matrix: SURFACE WATER # Samples Received: 5 Analyses Your Project #: B596463 Your C.O.C. #: n -a Report Date: 2015/06/02 Report #: R2008177 Version: 1 - Final CERTIFICATE OF ANALYSIS Date Date Quantity Extracted Analyzed Laboratory Method Primary Reference Organochlorinated Pesticides* 5 2015/05/28 2015/05/28 STL SOP -00254 EPA 8081B R2 m Reference Method suffix "m" indicates test methods incorporate validated modifications from specific reference methods to improve performance. Note: RPDs calculated using raw data. The rounding of final results may result in the apparent difference. * Maxxam is accredited as per the MDDELCC program. Encryption Key Please direct all questions regarding this Certificate of Analysis to your Project Manager. Rodrigo Caffarengo, Customer Service Email: RCaffarengo@maxxam.ca Phone# (514)448-9001 Ext:6336 Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 1 of 7 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne dolt pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B526959 Report Date: 2015/06/02 MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Client Project #: B596463 PESTICIDES (SURFACE WATER) Maxxam ID AW2719 AW2720 AW2721 AW2722 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 11:05 2015/05/21 10:10 2015/05/21 10:25 2015/05/21 10:35 COC Number n -a n -a n -a n -a Units AHZ739-01R/SW15-10 I AHZ740-01R/SW15-12 AHZ741-01R/SW15-13 AHZ742-01R/SW15-14 RDL I QC Batch OC PESTICIDES a -Chlordane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Chlorothalonil ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 d -BHC ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endosulfan I ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endosulfan II ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.0031 1459256 Endrin aldehyde ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endrin Ketone ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 g -Chlordane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 <0.004 0.004 1459256 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 1459256 Hexachloroethane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 o,p'-DDD ug/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 1459256 o,p'-DDE ug/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 1459256 o,p'-DDT ug/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 1459256 Octachlorostyrene ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Oxychlordane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 a -BHC ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 b -BHC ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Lindane ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Aldrin ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endrin ug/L <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.005 1459256 Dieldrin ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Heptachlor ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 p,p'-DDD ug/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 1459256 p,p'-DDE ug/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 1459256 p,p'-DDT ug/L <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 0.001 1459256 Endosulfan sulfate ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Methoxychlor ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 1 <0.003 10.003 1459256 Mirex ug/L <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 <0.003 10.0031 1459256 Surrogate Recovery I(%) 2-Chloronaphthalene % 91 92 91 92 1459256 Decachlorobiphenyl % 90 88 84 84 1459256 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 2 of 7 2015/06/02 17:52 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne doit pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B526959 Report Date: 2015/06/02 MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Client Project #: B596463 PESTICIDES (SURFACE WATER) Maxxam ID AW2723 Sampling Date 2015/05/21 10:50 COC Number n -a Units AHZ743-01R/SW15-15 RDL QC Batch OC PESTICIDES a -Chlordane ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Chlorothalonil ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 d -BHC ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endosulfan I ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endosulfan 11 ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endrin aldehyde ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endrin Ketone ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 g -Chlordane ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Hexachlorobenzene ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Hexachlorobutadiene ug/L <0.004 0.004 1459256 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene ug/L <0.01 0.01 1459256 Hexachloroethane ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 o,p'-DDD ug/L <0.001 0.001 1459256 o,p'-DDE ug/L <0.001 0.001 1459256 o,p'-DDT ug/L <0.001 0.001 1459256 Octachlorostyrene ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Oxychlordane ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 a -BHC ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 b -BHC ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Lindane ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Aldrin ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Endrin ug/L <0.005 0.005 1459256 Dieldrin ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Heptachlor ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Heptachlor epoxide ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 p,p'-DDD ug/L <0.001 0.001 1459256 p,p'-DDE ug/L <0.001 0.001 1459256 p,p'-DDT ug/L <0.001 0.001 1459256 Endosulfan sulfate ug/L <0.003 0.003 1459256 Methoxychlor I ug/L 1 <0.003 10.0031 1459256 Mirex ug/L 1 <0.003 0.003 1459256 Surrogate Recovery (%) 2-Chloronaphthalene % 94 1459256 Decachlorobiphenyl % 85 1459256 RDL = Reportable Detection Limit QC Batch = Quality Control Batch Page 3 of 7 2015/06/02 17:52 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne doit pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company Maxxam Job #: 6526959 Report Date: 2015/06/02 GENERAL COMMENTS MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Client Project #: B596463 Condition of sample(s) upon receipt: GOOD PESTICIDES (SURFACE WATER) Please note that the results have not been corrected for QC recoveries (spiked blank and method blank) nor for the surrogates. Results relate only to the items tested. Page 4 of 7 2015/06/02 17:52 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne doit pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B526959 Report Date: 2015/06/02 MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Client Project #: B596463 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT QA/QC Batch Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed Value Recovery Units QC Limits 1459256 AK2 Spiked Blank 2-Chloronaphthalene 2015/05/28 96 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/05/28 105 % 50-130 Chlorothalonil 2015/05/28 99 % N/A d -BHC 2015/05/28 103 % SO -130 Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/05/28 90 % 50-130 Endosulfan I 2015/05/28 116 % 50-130 Endosulfan 11 2015/05/28 115 % 50-130 Endrin aldehyde 2015/05/28 101 % 50-130 Endrin Ketone 2015/05/28 102 % 50-130 g -Chlordane 2015/05/28 103 % 50-130 Hexachlorobenzene 2015/05/28 105 % 50-130 Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/05/28 104 % 50-130 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/05/28 82 % 50-130 Hexachloroethane 2015/05/28 81 % 50-130 o,p'-DDD 2015/05/28 117 % 50-130 o,p'-DDE 2015/05/28 116 % 50-130 o,p'-DDT 2015/05/28 105 % 50-130 Octachlorostyrene 2015/05/28 105 % 50-130 Oxychlordane 2015/05/28 111 % 50-130 a -BHC 2015/05/28 107 % SO -130 b -BHC 2015/05/28 109 % 50-130 Lindane 2015/05/28 108 % 50-130 Aldrin 2015/05/28 108 % 50-130 Endrin 2015/05/28 97 % 50-130 Dieldrin 2015/05/28 126 % 50-130 Heptachlor 2015/05/28 101 % 50-130 Heptachlor epoxide 2015/05/28 112 % 50-130 p,p'-DDD 2015/05/28 105 % 50-130 p,p'-DDE 2015/05/28 108 % 50-130 p,p'-DDT 2015/05/28 97 % 50-130 Endosulfan sulfate 2015/05/28 103 % 50-130 Methoxychlor 2015/05/28 98 % 50-130 Mirex 2015/05/28 96 % 50-130 1459256 AK2 Method Blank 2-Chloronaphthalene 2015/05/29 87 % 50-130 a -Chlordane 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Chlorothalonil 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L d -BHC 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Decachlorobiphenyl 2015/05/29 81 % 50-130 Endosulfan 1 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Endosulfan II 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Endrin aldehyde 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Endrin Ketone 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L g -Chlordane 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Hexachlorobenzene 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Hexachlorobutadiene 2015/05/29 <0.004 ug/L Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 2015/05/29 <0.01 ug/L Hexachloroethane 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L o,p'-DDD 2015/05/29 <0.001 ug/L o,p'-DDE 2015/05/29 <0.001 ug/L o,p'-DDT 2015/05/29 <0.001 ug/L Octachlorostyrene 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Oxychlordane 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L a -BHC 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Page 5 of 7 2015/06/02 17:52 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne doit pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. Ma)(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B526959 Report Date: 2015/06/02 MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Client Project #: B596463 QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT(CONT'D) QA/QC Batch Init QC Type Parameter Date Analyzed Value Recovery Units QC Limits b -BHC 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Lindane 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Aldrin 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Endrin 2015/05/29 <0.005 ug/L Dieldrin 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Heptachlor 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Heptachlor epoxide 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L p,p'-DDD 2015/05/29 <0.001 ug/L p,p'-DDE 2015/05/29 <0.001 ug/L p,p'-DDT 2015/05/29 <0.001 ug/L Endosulfansulfate 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Methoxychlor 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Mirex 2015/05/29 <0.003 ug/L Spiked Blank: A blank matrix sample to which a known amount of the analyte, usually from a second source, has been added. Used to evaluate method accuracy. Method Blank: A blank matrix containing all reagents used in the analytical procedure. Used to identify laboratory contamination. Surrogate: A pure or isotopically labeled compound whose behavior mirrors the analytes of interest. Used to evaluate extraction efficiency. Page 6 of 7 2015/06/02 17:52 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne doit pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. Max(�"am A Bureau Veritas Group Company •f Maxxam Job #: B526959 MAXXAM ANALYTICS INC. Report Date: 2015/06/02 Client Project #: B596463 VALIDATION SIGNATURE PAGE The analytical data and all QC contained in this report were reviewed and validated by the following individual(s). 5. 4"C.�/G�;viSrE . C� Spwain\Ch®vigny (�jJ""1�'""� 2a03 -o72 Sylvain Chevigny, B.Sc., Chemist Maxxam has procedures in place to guard against improper use of the electronic signature and have the required "signatories", as per section 5.10.2 of ISO/IEC 17025:2005(E), signing the reports. For Service Group specific validation please refer to the Validation Signature Page. Page 7 of 7 2015/06/02 17:52 889 Montee de Liesse, Ville St -Laurent, Quebec, Canada H4T 1P5 Tel: (514) 448-9001 Fax: (514) 448-9199 Ligne sans frais : 1-877-4MAXXAM (462-9926) Ce certificat ne doit pas etre reproduit, sinon en entier, sans I'autorisation ecrite du laboratoire. This certificate may not be reproduced, except in its entirety, without the written approval of the laboratory. SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix J Benthic Macroinvertebrate Community Report September 11, 2015 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Community Report ® Stantec J.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Community Report for the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour Site Specific Risk Assessment of Sediment Prepared for: Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada Prepared by: Stantec Consulting Ltd. 1-70 Southgate Drive Guelph ON N 1 G 4P5 4 Stantec File No. 122511075 September 11, 2015 Sign -off Sheet This document entitled Benthic Macroinvertebrate Community Report for the Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour Site Specific Risk Assessment of Sediment was prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd. ("Stantec") for the account of Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada (the "Client"). Prepared by (signature) Joe Keene, M.Sc. Senior Benthic Ecologist Reviewed by (signature) Kathleen Todd, M.Sc. Senior Aquatic Ecologist ® Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................1.1 2.0 METHODS.....................................................................................................................2.1 2.1 SAMPLE COLLECTION TIMES AND LOCATIONS........................................................... 2.1 2.2 FIELD SAMPLING METHODS...........................................................................................2.1 2.3 LABORATORY METHODS................................................................................................ 2.2 2.3.1 Substrate Particle Size Analysis................................................................... 2.2 2.3.2 Benthic Sample Processing........................................................................ 2.2 2.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL............................................................... 2.5 2.4.1 Field QA/QC.................................................................................................2.5 2.4.2 Laboratory QA/QC..................................................................................... 2.6 2.4.3 Data Management.....................................................................................2.6 3.0 RESULTS........................................................................................................................3.1 3.1 SUPPORTING HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS....................................................................3.1 3.1.1 Substrate Particle Size Distribution............................................................. 3.3 3.1.2 Total Organic Carbon.................................................................................3.4 3.2 TAXONOMY AND QA/QC RESULTS..............................................................................3.5 3.3 SUMMARY OF BENTHIC COMMUNITY DATA............................................................. 3.14 4.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................4.1 LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: Hilsenhoff rating system (Hilsenhoff, 1987) ...................................................... 2.5 Table 3-1: In situ Water Quality and Supporting Habitat at Benthic Sampling Stations .............................................................................................................................. 3.2 Table 3-2: Benthic community endpoints, Port Burwell SCH, 2015 ................................ 3.6 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1: Project Location................................................................................................. 1.2 Figure 3-1: Sediment Particle Size Composition............................................................... 3.3 Figure 3-2: Total organic carbon (TOC) content of Port Burwell SCH sediment. Inset dashed line represents the Provincial Sediment Quality Guideline for the Lowest Effect Level of TOC (MOE, 2008) ........................................................ 3.4 Figure 3-3: Mean Invertebrate Density at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. Error bars represent +/- one standard error about the mean ...................................... 3.7 Figure 3-4: Taxa Richness at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015 .......................................... 3.8 Figure 3-5: Simpson's Evenness Index at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015 ..................... 3.9 Figure 3-6: Simpson's Diversity Index at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015 ..................... 3.10 Figure 3-7: EPT Taxa Richness Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015 ...................................... 3.11 Figure 3-8: Hilsenhoff Biotic Index at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015 .......................... 3.12 Figure 3-9: Relative abundance of taxonomic groups of Benthic macroinvertebrates collected at Port Burwell SCH stations, 2015 ................................................3.14 (30 Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data ® Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 1.0 Introduction The Port Burwell Small Craft Harbour (SCH) is located in southern Ontario at the mouth of Big Otter Creek where it empties into Lake Erie (Figure 1-1). The main objective of the benthic macroinvertebrate survey was to characterize benthic communities in Big Otter Creek in the vicinity of its outfall and near -shore areas of Lake Erie to assess potential historical sediment contamination. The benthic community sampling was part of a larger sampling program that included water, surface sediments and sediment core sampling conducted at the same time to support the Site Specific Risk Assessment (SSRA) and to delineate known and potential Contaminants of Concern (COCs). Fifteen benthic stations were established, both in areas of known historical contamination and at several reference locations outside the influence of known sources of contamination. Benthic macroinvertebrates are small -bodied organisms that live on the bottom of aquatic environments, such as lakes and rivers. They are commonly used as biological indicators of water and habitat quality. More specifically, macroinvertebrates are good indicators of overall water quality and environmental conditions for the following reasons (Griffiths, 1998): • They are abundant in all types of aquatic systems; • They are readily identified by experienced taxonomists; They usually remain in a localized area, as they have restricted mobility and specific habitat preferences / requirements; • They are continuously subjected to all conditions of the local environment throughout their life cycle; and • They integrate the effects of all pollutants and environmental conditions over time and, therefore, provide a holistic measure of water and sediment quality. Benthic macroinvertebrates represent an important food resource for fish, which in turn represent an important food resource for humans. Because of these trophic links, the health of the benthic community can reflect general ecological health and human health. ® Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Figure 1-1: Project Location Bram plan a :fpV �. R1i55i35aa9a N -_ C� ,Lake Ontario Furan Londan j KEY ff , ! Lake Erie iIj®iT F�rf SfBr�iey i�5;P00,OM n flake s,�a PC) Rr suRwFLU L d)l Lake Erie Legend Property Boundary 515�.•G Stantec 1.2 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Figure 1-2: Benthic and Sediment Sampling Locations A m Stantec 1.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 2.0 Methods There were three main components to the Port Burwell SCH benthic macroinvertebrate survey: sample collection, laboratory analysis and QA/QC. 2.1 SAMPLE COLLECTION TIMES AND LOCATIONS Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected at a total of fifteen sites in Big Otter Creek, and Lake Erie, near the Port Burwell SHC Ontario, between March 9 and March 16, 2015 (Figure 1-2) . 2.2 FIELD SAMPLING METHODS Due to the winter season in which benthic and sediment sampling took place, samples were collected through the ice. At each station, four contiguous 20 cm (8") holes were bored through the ice using a power auger. A steel spud was used to remove the ice plug between the four holes, creating an opening sufficiently large to accommodate sampling equipment. Benthic invertebrate samples were collected using a Petite Ponarrm grab sampler (area = 0.0232 M2). Three composite grabs were collected at each station for a total area sampled of 0.0696 M2 per station. Each Ponar grab was sieved in the field using a sieve pail fitted with a 500 µm mesh screen. The three grabs from each Station were preserved in 10% buffered formalin prior to submission to the laboratory for sorting and identification. In addition to standard external jar labels, samples were labeled internally using waterproof paper. The labels for each sample included project number, location, date, Station name and number of jars. The location of all sampling Stations was recorded in UTMs using a Global Positioning System (GPS). A written description of each Station was also completed, which included information such as station depth, presence of macrophytes, presence of algae, sediment odour, etc. At each benthic sampling station, sediment samples were collected using a Petite Ponar-rm sampler for laboratory analysis of total organic carbon (TOC), particle size distribution, metals, general chemistry, BTEX and petroleum hydrocarbons, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, pesticides and herbicides. These variables, which can strongly influence community structure, were integrated into the data interpretation where applicable. Sediment samples were sealed in sterile, glass sample jars provided by the analytical laboratory, kept in a cooler on ice (4 to 10 °C) and shipped to Maxxam Analytics Inc. (Maxxam; Mississauga, ON) for analysis. Supporting environmental measurements (dissolved oxygen (DO), water temperature, pH, conductivity) were obtained at each benthic sampling Station and measured near the water/sediment interface. All parameters were measured using a YSI water quality meter and Stantec 2.1 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Sonde multi -probe, prior to the collection of sediment. The multi -probe was allowed to stabilize prior to obtaining a reading. Total depth at each benthic collection Station was measured with a metre stick in shallow areas, or with a depth sounder in deeper lake areas. 2.3 LABORATORY METHODS 2.3.1 Substrate Sediment samples from each of the fifteen benthic stations were collected and submitted to Stantec's Geotechnical Laboratory in Ottawa, Ontario, for laboratory analysis of particle size using the stacked sieve and hydrometer methods. This information, coupled with recorded substrate descriptions taken in the field at each benthic station, provides a basis for establishing potential substrate effects on the benthic communities present. Substrate particle sizes were divided into categories based on the following diameters: Coarse Sand = > 2.0 mm; Medium Sand = 0.425 - 2.0 mm; Fine Sand = 0.075 - 0.425 mm; Silt = 0.003 - 0.075 mm; and Clay = < 0.003 mm. 2.3.2 Benthic Sample Processing 2.3.2.1 Sorting and Identification Samples were transported by the field crew to Stantec's Benthic Ecology Laboratory in Guelph Ontario, where they were logged in and checked to ensure that they were properly preserved and that sample labels matched those on the sample submission form. 2.3.2.2 Sample Sorting Benthic invertebrate sorting was facilitated by staining each sample with a solution of eosin -13 and Biebrich scarlet, which preferentially stains organisms and leaves organic debris and sediment unstained. Excess formalin from each sample was removed prior to sorting using a 500 Nm sieve and the sample debris washed thoroughly to remove any residual preservative and small debris. The screening of material through 3.35 mm and 500 pm sieves separated macro - invertebrates and detritus into a set of density and size -based fractions that were then sorted at 10 to 40X magnification using a binocular dissecting scope. The largest sieve allowed for the removal of sticks, leaves and rocks from the sample. Any large organisms (such as leeches, crayfish, mollusks and large insects) retained on the sieve were removed from the associated debris and enumerated. The benthos were systematically sorted from the debris by placing small quantities, no more than five mL, in a gridded petri dish and examining the material under a stereomicroscope. Each petri dish of sample was scanned twice. 4 Stantec 2.2 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 2.3.2.3 Taxonomy All macroinvertebrates were identified to the lowest practical level using recent publications. Taxonomic resolution was dependent on available keys and published ecological information, as well as the condition and maturity of the organisms being identified. A detailed list of all taxonomic keys used is included in Appendix Al. Data were tabulated using an ExcelTM spreadsheet to facilitate data analysis, interpretation and presentation. Chironomids and oligochaetes were mounted on glass slides in a clearing medium (non -phenol based) prior to identification using a phase contrast microscope. In samples with large numbers of oligochaetes, a random sample of no less than 20% of the picked individuals were mounted on slides for identification. Individual organisms that were obviously different (e.g., oligochaetes with eyes, a proboscis or extra -long chaetae) were removed from the sample and mounted separately. Similarly, samples that contained large numbers of chironomids, individuals that could be identified using a dissecting scope (e.g., Cryptochironomus, Microtendipes, Chironomus, Monodiamesa, Procladius, and Heterotrissocladius) were enumerated and removed from the sample. The remaining individuals were sorted into sub -families and tribes. Individuals were further grouped according to characteristic traits, (e.g., similar colour, eye configurations, head shape, etc.). Representatives from each grouping (a minimum of 20%) were mounted for identification to lowest practical level. Following sorting and identification, invertebrates were stored in 70 to 80% ethanol in airtight vials. Each vial was labeled internally with survey name, date, Site and replicate number and the vial contents. Slide mounted material was similarly labeled and archived. Following sorting, the remaining sorted and unsorted sample debris was re -preserved separately in 10% formalin. All data were tabulated in an ExcelTM spreadsheet to facilitate data analysis, interpretation and presentation. 2.3.2.4 Data Analysis The following analyses were completed on the benthic invertebrate dataset at the lowest practical level of taxonomy: • Total density (total number of organisms per m2) • Taxa richness (number of taxa per Station). Simpson's Evenness (E), a measure of the distribution of individuals among sampled taxa (range: 0 to 1). A more equitable distribution indicates a more stable community, which is not dominated by one particular taxonomic group. The Evenness value for such a community would be 1. E= 1 /E (p)2/S ® Stantec 2.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT where `pi' is the proportion of individuals of the `ith' taxon in a community of `S' taxa (i = 1 to S) • Simpson's Diversity Index (D), the probability that two organisms, selected at random, are from a different taxonomic group (range: 0 to 1, with larger values indicative of communities that are more diverse). Simpson's D is influenced by the numerically dominant taxa. D = 1 - E (p;)2 where `p' is the proportion of individuals of the `ith' taxon in a community of `S' taxa (i = 1 to S). • Taxon proportion (e.g., relative abundance of taxonomic groups) The percentage of Chironomidae, Oligochaeta, EPT taxa, Molluscs etc. were calculated using the total number of organisms in each group divided by the total organisms in a sample. Chironomids and oligochaetes tend to be quite tolerant of nutrient enrichment or polluted conditions. Often in highly contaminated sites, chironomids and oligochaetes are the only remaining invertebrate taxa (Pinder, 1986; Hilsenhoff, 1987; Hilsenhoff, 1988; Faith and Norris, 1989). Hilsenhoff Biotic Index: The Hilsenhoff Biotic Index (HBI) is commonly used to determine the extent of enrichment due to organic nutrient pollution (Hilsenhoff, 1987). Sensitivity values are assigned to each taxon based on their tolerance to organic nutrients ranging from zero (intolerant) to 10 (very tolerant). HBI is calculated using the following formula: Where: HBI = [E(i- (TV; * x;)] n TV; = the tolerance value of the iih taxon Xi = the density of the iih taxon n = the number of taxa in the sample For each Site, the HBI is compared to the values listed in Table 2-1 to provide a rating of water quality. • EPT Index: The EPT index is a count of the number of taxa belonging to the taxonomic orders Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera (mayflies, stoneflies, and caddisflies, respectively). These three groups typically include organisms that are sensitive to reductions in habitat quality. High EPT values are typically found in areas where water quality is good and benthic habitat is both complex and stable. EPT taxa richness was calculated as the total number of EPT taxa at a station. ® Stantec 2.4 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Table 2-1: Hilsenhoff rating system (Hilsenhoff, 1987) 111911111691 0.00-3.5 Excellent No apparent enrichment 3.51-4.50 Very Good Slight enrichment 4.51-5.50 Good Some enrichment 5.51-6.50 Fair Fairly significant enrichment 6.51-7.50 Fairly Poor Significant enrichment 7.51-8.50 Poor Very significant enrichment 8.51-10.00 Very Poor Severe enrichment 2.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE & QUALITY CONTROL The following QA/QC measures were applied to the field sample collection of benthic invertebrates: • field personnel had a good understanding of the project objectives, and were experienced with required field equipment and sampling procedures; • safety measures were identified, understood and followed; • sampling equipment was checked frequently for proper operation and maintained in good working order; • criteria for sample acceptability was established (e.g. sample was rejected if sampler jaws are not completely closed); • a visual description of the collected sediment was recorded; • the sampling device was rinsed between composite samples and between Stations; • field sieving and preservation was completed immediately after samples were collected; • sample containers were labeled internally and externally with relevant information; • detailed field notes were maintained on appropriate field data sheets prepared prior to the field survey to facilitate the completeness of the field data, and subsequent data entry; • chain -of -custody forms and sample submission forms were used and appropriately filed; and • error associated with sample sorting and sub -sampling was assessed (based on samples collected from this Study Area) and was part of the QA/QC process for the benthic community survey. Stantec 2.5 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 2.4.2 Labowtory QA/Q(- Percent recovery, or sorting efficiency, was determined by re-examining the sorted debris of samples after initial sorting of organisms was complete. Any additional organisms found during the re -sort were identified, counted, and added to the dataset. Percent recovery was calculated using the original number of organisms found and the revised total (following re- sorting). Percent recovery was performed on 10% (2) of the samples collected. 2.4.3 Dare'r��e��oerr�ri All pelagic organisms, including Cladocerans and Cyclopoid Copepods, were removed from the dataset prior to analysis since they are non-benthic, wide ranging and may not be indicative of conditions at the Stations sampled. In all cases, data were double-checked after entry into a spreadsheet from the bench sheets. This was accomplished by calculating the total number of organisms at a Site and the total number of taxa at a Site within the spreadsheet. Then the totals were double-checked using a scientific calculator and the bench sheets to calculate independent sums of the number of organisms and number of taxa per Site. These totals were compared to the spreadsheet totals and any discrepancies were accounted for. After all data are entered, the spreadsheets were scanned for consistency among replicates. Taxa that appeared in most of five replicates in large numbers and not in the remainder were scrutinized and checked against bench sheets. Similarly, taxa that appeared only in one replicate of five were checked against bench sheets. Total numbers of organisms between grabs were also surveyed. Any large discrepancies were checked against bench sheets, specifically looking at the fraction sorted, to determine if sub - sampling multiplication was to blame. If the listed sub -sample fraction was suspect, the sorted and unsorted sample jars were examined to confirm the fractions sorted. All data were presented with Port Burwell SCH benthic sampling stations arranged from upstream to downstream along Big Otter Creek. In this way, changes to benthic communities can be more easily related to any potential pollutant concentration gradients. Stations BI -15-10 and BI -15-3 represent transitional areas of potential variability in physical and chemical water quality due to the mixing of Big Otter Creek waters with Lake Erie waters. Stations BI -15-12 to BI - 15 -15 were selected to reflect the background Lake Erie benthic community. Stantec W BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 3.1 SUPPORTING HABITAT CHARACTERISTICS In situ water quality at benthic macroinvertebrate sampling Stations is presented in Table 3-1. Conductivity was generally higher at the Big Otter Creek benthic stations where it ranged between 682 and 813 pS/cm. Conductivity was lower at Lake Erie Stations where it ranged between 324 and 476 pS/cm. The transitional stations at the mouth of Big Otter Creek had conductivities which ranged between 328 and 795 pS/cm. It is likely that water in this area is a mix of lake and creek water that may fluctuate in conductivity depending on wind and current effects in the mixing zone. Dissolved oxygen levels were relatively consistent among Big Otter Creek Stations and ranged between 10.04 and 11.21 mg/L (Table 3-1). Dissolved oxygen levels in Lake Erie were lower than those of Big Otter Creek and ranged between 6.85 and 9.79 mg/L. It is probable that prevailing wind and water currents within the lake have a strong influence on dissolved oxygen levels. During the winter months, thick ice cover can sequester lake water from atmospheric oxygen resulting in an overall reduction in dissolved oxygen levels. For all Port Burwell SCH Stations, pH values fell within a relatively narrow band between 7.9 and 8.49. These values are typical for southern Ontario waters. Substrate within Big Otter Creek was comprised primarily of fine sand, silt and detritus. Upstream stations within the creek were dominated by fine sand. Farther downstream, at benthic Stations BI -15-1, BI -15-8 and BI -15-9, substrates were finer and dominated by silt. Lake Erie Stations were dominated by hard -packed fine sand. No aquatic macrophytes or algae were noted at any Station. ® Stantec 3.1 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Table 3-1: In situ Water Quality and Supporting Habitat at Benthic Sampling Stations StationQuality LSIite Depth Substrate Description 8.26 712 BI -15-1 1 1.75 Fine sand, detritus and silt 0.17 10.13 BI -15-04 3.0 Detritus, fine sand and silt 0.01 10.04 8.11 784 BI -15-05 2.75 Detritus, silt and fine sand 0.07 10.11 8.06 742 BI -15-06 1.4 Silt, fine sand and detritus 0.57 10.42 8.18 769 BI -15-07 1.25 Fine sand, detritus and silt 0.05 10.57 8.02 686 BI -15-01 1.25 Silt, fine sand and detritus 0.00 11.21 7.98 759 BI -15-08 1.4 Silt, fine sand and detritus 0.16 11.19 8.17 813 BI -15-09 1.5 Silt, fine sand and detritus 0.23 10.91 8.03 712 BI -15-02 1.5 Fine sand and silt 0.05 10.66 8.02 682 BI -15-10 1.2 Fine sand, silt and detritus 0.02 7.90 8.21 328 BI -15-03 2.0 Sand and silt 1.22 11.79 8.34 795 BI -15-12 3.8 Fine sand, silt and detritus 0.42 9.54 8.49 NA BI -15-13 4.2 Fine sand, silt and detritus 0.29 9.79 8.32 324 BI -15-14 1.30 Fine sand, silt and detritus 0.04 7.34 8.15 332 BI -15-15 1.9 Fine sand and silt 0.08 6.85 7.90 476 Stantec 3.2 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 3.1.1 Substrate Particle Size Distribution The particle size distribution of sediments can represent a confounding influence on benthic community structure that is independent of water or sediment quality. Certain taxa groups, such as worms and chironomids, have a distinct preference for fine soft substrates, whereas other taxa groups, such as stoneflies, most mayflies and certain caddisfly families, prefer much coarser and more complex substrates, including gravel, cobble and boulder. Particle size distribution for sediment is illustrated in Figure 3-1. Substrates within Big Otter Creek stations were dominated by silt and fine sand which accounted for between 75% and 97% of total composition. Upstream stations were generally comprised of coarser materials, including 23% medium sand at Station SD -15-1 1. Substrates became finer with distance downstream and were finest at Station SD -15-8 where clay and silt accounted for 87% of the total composition. Lake Erie stations were dominated by hard -packed, fine sand which comprised between 73.5% and 80% of the total substrate composition. The remainder was comprised primarily of silt (10- 25%). Clay, medium sand and coarse sand together represented less than 5 % of the total substrate composition at Lake Erie stations. 100% 90% 80% 0 70% CL 60% E U 50% 40% U 30% 20% 10% 0% Station Figure 3-1: Sediment Particle Size Composition 4 Stantec ■ Clay ❑Silt ■ Fine Sand ❑Medium Sand ■ Coarse Sand 3.3 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 3.1.2 Total Or�janic Carbon Sediments with TOC values above the Provincial Sediment Quality Guideline (PSQG) Severe Effect Level (SEL) (Ontario Ministry of Environment, 2008) are likely to have an effect on benthic community composition that may be independent of water quality. High sediment TOC can result in decreased oxygen availability and smothering effects. Using benthic invertebrate communities as bio -monitors for pollutants may not be as sensitive from stations where TOC is above the SEL. Organic pollutants have a tendency to bind preferentially to organic materials in sediment and, as a result, sediments that are higher in TOC are often more impacted. Total organic carbon (TOC) composition in sediment ranged between 0.2 % at Station SD -15-3 and 1.4 % at Station SD -15-8 (Figure 3-2). Stations SD -15-7, SD -15-1, SD -15-8 and SD -15-9 had sediment TOC levels at or above the Lowest Effect Level (LEL) (Ontario Ministry of Environment, 2008) . Ili c 1.4 0 .0 L a 1.2 U a., M; a 0 0.6 0.4 U L a 0.2 SO�� S�� SOS SQA SQA SQA S�� SOS S�N 50�� SQA SO�� SOBS SOBS X SO Station Figure 3-2: Total organic carbon (TOC) content of Port Burwell SCH sediment. Inset dashed line represents the Provincial Sediment Quality Guideline for the Lowest Effect Level of TOC (MOE, 2008). Stantec 3.4 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT 3.2 TAXONOMY AND QA/QC RESULTS A complete taxonomic list of invertebrates identified in the 2015 Port Burwell survey is provided in Appendix A-2. QA/QC results for sample sorting efficiency are included in Appendix A-3, Table A-3-1. Six of the 45 benthic grabs (2 of the 15 samples) were selected randomly for resorting. Percent recovery was 96.7% or higher for all resorted samples, with a mean of 98.0%. Seven of the fifteen samples were sub -sampled at one quarter, one sample was sorted at one half and the remaining seven samples were sorted in their entirety (Appendix A-3, Table A-3-2). Benthic community endpoints assessed at the lowest practical level are presented in Table 3-2. ® Stantec 3.5 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Table 3-2: Benthic community endpoints, Port Burwell SCH, 2015 Density (organisms per m2) 19828 15560 32601 16034 35417 30963 21394 18261 8376 603 29 43 14 57 172 Taxa Richness 9 19 15 20 15 16 21 18 14 16 2 1 1 2 3 Hilsenhoff Biotic Index 9.66 9.53 9.90 9.13 9.72 9.82 9.38 9.73 9.82 7.98 8 10 8 9.5 9.82 HBI Interpretation Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Very Poor Poor Very Poor Very Very Poor Poor Poor Poor EPT Richness 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Simpson's Evenness Index 0.251 0.186 0.219 0.238 0.276 0.159 0.112 0.124 0.180 0.452 1 1 1 0.8 0.471 Simpson's Diversity Index 0.557 0.717 0.696 0.789 0.758 0.557 0.575 0.551 0.603 0.862 0.5 0 0 0.375 0.292 % Oligochaetes 94.5 86.8 95.7 76.2 93.3 91.7 87.0 91.0 94.9 50 0 100 0 75 83.3 % Chironomids 4.9 8.1 3.5 21.3 6.2 6.5 9.7 5.7 3.9 19 50 0 100 25 8.3 3.6 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Density Mean total organism density ranged between 14 organisms per m2 at Lake Erie Station 13 and 35,417 organisms per m2 at Station 7 (Figure 3-3). High densities at Big Otter Creek Stations suggest appreciable eutrophication at these sites resulting from nutrient inputs. Low densities of organisms at the Lake Erie stations may reflect a more oligotrophic environment; however, the reductions there are more likely a result of substrate effects. Fine, packed sand does not provide ideal habitat for benthic organisms. 45000 N 40000 E 35000 CL " 30000 N a 25000 rn p 20000 ao0i 15000 E 10000 Z 5000 0 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 3 12 13 14 15 Benthic Station Figure 3-3: Mean Invertebrate Density at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. Error bars represent +/- one standard error about the mean. Stantec 3.7 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Taxa Richness The number or richness of macroinvertebrate taxa ranged between 1 at Stations 12 and 13, and 21 at Station 8 (Figure 3-4). Taxa richness was consistently higher at Big Otter Creek Stations and lower in Lake Erie Stations. The low richness values in the Lake Erie communities are likely a result of substrate effects. Fine, packed sand does not provide ideal habitat for benthic organisms. Taxa richness was higher in the softer substrates of the creek communities; however, values ranging between 9 and 21 are lower than would be expected in an un -impacted watercourse of this size. Taxa richness fluctuated between this range throughout the Big Otter Creek Stations and no specific trend in taxa richness was observed. Impacts appear to be systemic and are likely related to general eutrophication effects. 24 101] X 16 0 12 E n z 8 4 X 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 3 12 13 14 15 Benthic Station Figure 3-4: Taxa Richness at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Simpson's Evenness Index Simpson's Evenness Index values are lower when communities are less balanced, with dominance by only a few taxa (index range: 0 to 1, with 1 representing an evenly balanced community). Typically, the more evenly distributed the taxa are within a benthic community, the more stable the environment and the better the water and habitat quality. When taxa richness and density are low, the calculation for Simpson's Evenness can return variable or contrary results. Communities with very few organisms are not indicative of good water or habitat quality, despite having high Simpson's Evenness values. Simpson's Evenness Index values for Port Burwell SCH benthic Stations ranged between 0.112 at Station 8 to 1.000 at Stations 3, 12 and 13 (Figure 3-5). Stations 3, 12, 13, 14 and 15 had very low density and diversity and the resulting Simpson's Evenness values were misleadingly high. Of the remaining Stations, BI -15-10 had the highest Simpson's Evenness value. Simpson's Evenness was the lowest at Stations BI -15-1, BI 15-8, BI -15-9 and BI -15-2 which corresponds to the areas of highest organic material and finest substrate particle size and reflects the dominance of benthic communities by pollution -tolerant oligochaetes in these areas. M• W0.8 0.7 N c 0.6 c 0.5 W 0.4 0 a 0.3 E h 0.2 NI I 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 3 12 13 14 15 Benthic Station Figure 3-5: Simpson's Evenness Index at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. 4 Stantec 3.9 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Simpson's Diversity Index Simpson's Diversity Index values are lower when communities are less taxonomically diverse (Index range: 0 to 1, with 1 representing a diverse community). As with the Simpson's Evenness calculations, Simpson's Diversity calculated for communities with low taxa richness and low density can return variable or contrary results. Simpson's Diversity Index values ranged between 0 at Stations 12 and 13, and 0.862 at Station 10 (Figure 3-6). Lower diversity was observed at Stations 1, 8, 9 and 2, corresponding to areas dominated by soft silt, where oligochaetes dominated the benthic assemblage. The community at Station 10 had the highest Simpson's Diversity Index value which suggests that the community at this Station was more diverse (i.e., suggestive of better water quality and habitat quality). C�� axi 0.8 0.7 L 0.6 a� 0 0.5 0.4 0 Q 0.3 E in 0.2 M 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 3 12 13 14 15 Benthic Station Figure 3-6: Simpson's Diversity Index at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT EPT Taxa Richness The taxonomic richness of EPT organisms was low for all stations, ranging between 0 and 2 EPT taxa (Figure 3-7). The benthic communities at Lake Erie stations contained no pollution -sensitive taxa. These low EPT taxa richness values suggest that water and sediment quality within the Study Area were relatively poor with little habitat complexity and low habitat stability. 3 a X a2 a W w- 0 E 1 7 Z 0 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 3 12 13 14 15 Benthic Station Figure 3-7: EPT Taxa Richness Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. Hilsenhoff Biotic Index Hilsenhoff Biotic Indices were relatively high throughout all stations assessed in the Port Burwell SCH study (Figure 3-8). Values ranged between 8 at Stations 10 and 3, and 10 at Station 12. This indicates that water quality was poor to very poor with very significant to severe organic pollution. Since HBI scores were very high at all stations, impairment from nutrient inputs appears to be a systemic issue and likely reflects effects of agriculture within the watershed. Stantec 3.11 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT ffs� I X 7 u 6 0 m 5 t 4 c 3 h 2 N 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 3 12 13 14 15 Benthic Station Figure 3-8: Hilsenhoff Biotic Index at Port Burwell SCH Stations, 2015. Relative Abundance of Benthic Taxa Numerous authors have reported a graded sensitivity of macroinvertebrates to pollutants. The least tolerant organisms are mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies (Arnekleiv and Storset, 1995). Within each of these relatively sensitive groups, tolerance is variable by species. Conversely, Chironomids and Oligochaetes have a documented tolerance to many pollutants in the aquatic environment. For example, in a study of Benthic invertebrate communities in metal - contaminated (As, Cd, Cu, Pb, Mn, and Zn) depositional habitat, oligochaetes and chironomids represented over 90% of the Benthic community (Canfield et al., 1994). The quantification of Benthic community structure may be indicative of environmental stress when it is shown that a single species or group comprises greater than 600 of the total community assemblage (Pinder, 1986). The majority of Port Burwell SCH stations were dominated by Oligochaete taxa (Figure 3-9) which accounted for 50% to 100% of the individuals found. These worm communities were predominantly comprised of pollution tolerant taxa, including Potamothrix bavaricus, Limnodrilus hoffineisteri, L. cervix and L. claparedeianus. P. bavaricus is an invasive species from central Europe which is often found in highly polluted habitats. It has evident resistance to various pollutants which enables it to settle in areas unsuitable for other Oligochaetes species (Molnar, 2008). L. hoffineisteri is present in freshwater of variable quality and its progressive dominance of Benthic communities is closely related to the organic pollution level (Brinkhurst, 1969). It is classified as hypereutrophic, indicating it can thrive in areas with very high nutrient loading. L. claparedeianus and L. cervix also thrive in eutrophic areas and are good indicators of organic sediments and nutrient inputs. 4 Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Chironomids represented a relatively small proportion of the assemblages at most Stations but were typically the next -largest contributor to community composition after Oligochaetes (Figure 3-9). The chironomid communities in the creek Stations were dominated by relatively pollution - tolerant taxa, including Chironomus, Cryptochironomus, Phaenopsectra, Polypedilum halterale and Procladius. Lake Erie Stations contained a few isolated chironomids which in some cases (BI -15-13) represented the entire community. The burrowing mayfly Hexagenia was found in small numbers at several stations and was associated with fine, soft, silty sediments in which it burrows (benthic Stations 4, 5, 1, 8 and 9). As a mayfly, Hexagenia is a relatively pollution intolerant organism and its presence within Big Otter Creek indicates that oxygen levels generally do not drop low enough to create toxic effects. Bivalves, primarily consisting of the fingernail clams Pisidium and Musculium transversum, were relatively common at benthic Stations 7, 1, 8 and 9 (where substrates were finer), though bialves represented less than 5% of the benthic assemblages there. Benthic Station 10 was the most diverse and evenly distributed of the benthic communities assessed. The Oligochaete community at this station included the Naidid taxa Nais and Vejdovskyella intermedia, in addition to the Tubificid taxa found at other stations. It also contained the largest proportion of Ceratopogonid taxa, including Mallochohelea and Culicoides. Benthic Station 10 is located near the outfall of the municipal sewage treatment plant which may have affected benthic community composition here. A few, relatively rare or pollution -sensitive taxa were found sporadically within the Study Area in low numbers. Diporeia, an amphipod, was found at benthic Station 15 and is typically found in deep, cool waters, below the thermocline. While it has little preference for substrate or organic matter (Marzolf, 1965), its presence in this relatively shallow area is likely due to the winter season in which benthic samples were collected. The Elmid beetle Macronychus glabratus was found at two of the Port Burwell SCH Stations (BI -15-10 and BI -15-1 1) and is associated with submerged woody debris upon which it feeds. A single individual of two pollution -sensitive stonefly taxa were found; Taeniopteryx metequi at benthic Station 6, and an immature Capniidae at benthic Station 10. Taeniopteryx are typically associated with relatively fast stream velocities and coarse substrates, so its presence may have been a result of drift from locations farther upstream. ® Stantec 3.13 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT c 0 .y 0 a E 0 U c a� U W CL 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 Its, I .............................................................. ............................... .............................. .............. ............. ............. 6 7 1 11 4 5 8 9 Benthic Sta ® Oligocha ■ Chironorr ❑ Crustace( R EPT ❑Otherinse ❑ Bivalves ❑ Other 1� 2 10 lion 3 12 13 14 15 Figure 3-9: Relative abundance of taxonomic groups of benthic macro!nvertebrates collected at Port Burwell SCH stations, 2015. 3.3 SUMMARY OF BENTHIC COMMUNITY DATA The benthic macroinvertebrate communities assessed in the Port Burwell SCH area are primarily influenced by substrate composition and impacts from high nutrient availability. All Big Otter Creek Stations showed evidence of water quality impairment in the form of eutrophication, suggesting upstream inputs of nutrients from agricultural sources. No evidence of point sources of toxic effects was present within the benthic data. The soft, fine, silt sediments at Stations 7, 1, 8 and 9 were highest in TOC and contained communities dominated by pollution -tolerant oligochaete taxa. A shift in community composition at Station 10 may reflect inputs of effluent from the nearby municipal sewage treatment plant outfall or may be a result of the relatively variable water quality within the Big Otter Creek/Lake Erie transitional mixing zone. Lake Erie benthic communities were generally impoverished, with low density and diversity, due primarily to the presence of hard -packed, fine, sand substrates that are not ideal habitats for most benthic organisms. Stantec BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Arnekleiv, J.V. and L. Storset. 1995. Downstream effects of mine drainage on benthos and fish in a Norwegian river: a comparison of the situation before and after river rehabilitation. Journal of Geochemical Exploration. 52:35-43. Brinkhurst, R.O. 1969. The Fauna of Pollution. In: The Great Lakes as an Environment. Great lakes institute, University of Toronto, PR 39 97-112. Canfield, T.J., N.E. Kemble, W.G. Brumbaugh, F.J. Dwyer, C.G. Ingersoll and J.F. Fairchild. 1994. Use of benthic invertebrate community structure and the sediment quality triad to evaluate metal -contaminated sediment in the Upper Clark Fork River, Montana. Env. Toxicol. Chem. 13:1999-2012. Faith, D. P. & Norris, R. H. (1989). Correlation of environmental variables with patterns of distribution and abundance of common and rare freshwater macro invertebrates.Biol. Conserv., 50, 77-98. Griffiths, R.W. 1998. Sampling and Evaluating the Water Quality of Streams in Southern Ontario - A How to Manual. Prepared for the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 33 pp + Appendices. Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1987. An Improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. Great Lakes Entomol. 20:31-39. Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1988. Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family -level biotic index. J.N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 7(1):65-68. Marzolf, G.R. 1965. Substrate relations of the burrowing amphipod Pontoporeia affinis in Lake Michigan. Ecology 46: 579-592. Molnar, Jennifer, Rebecca L Gamboa, Carmen Revenga and Mark D Spalding, 2008. "Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity." Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 6 (9), pp. 485-492. Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 2008. Guidelines for Identifying, Assessing and Managing Contaminated Sediments in Ontario: An Integrated Approach. Queen's Printer for Ontario. PIBS 6658e, May, 2008. Pinder, L.C.V. 1986. Biology of freshwater Chironomidae, p.l -23. In Mittler TE, Radovsky FJ, Resh VH. (eds.), Annual Review of Entomology 31. Annual Reviews, Inc., Palo Alto, CA. ® Stantec 4.1 BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATE COMMUNITY REPORT FOR THE PORT BURWELL SMALL CRAFT HARBOUR SITE SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT Appendix A: Benthic Macroinvertebrate Data ® Stantec Taxonomic References and Identification Levels for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Groups Group Taxonomic Level Taxonomic References Coelenterata Genus Smith, 2001 Turbellaria Class/Species Kenk, 1972; Kenk, 1976; Kenk, 1989; Smith, 2001; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Nematoda Phylum Smith, 2001; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Nemertea Genus Smith, 2001; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Tardigrada Class Smith, 2001; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Oligochaeta Species Brinkhurst, 1986; Brinkhurst and Cook, 1974; Kathman and Brinkhurst, 1999; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Polychaeta Species Smith, 2001 Hirudinea Species Davies, 1971; Klemm, 1972; Klemm, 1982; Klemm, 1991; Sawyer, 1974; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Acarina Order Cook, 1974; Cook, 1976; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Ostracoda Class Smith, 2001; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Harpacticoida Order Smith, 2001 Amphipoda Genus/Species Bousfield, 1958; Holsinger, 1976 Isopoda Genus Smith, 2001; Williams, 1976 Decapoda Species Crocker and Barr, 1968; Fetzner, 2004; Hobbs and Hall, Jr., 1974; Thorp and Covich, 2001 Mysidacea Species Smith, 2001 Collembola Order/Genus/Species Thorp and Covich, 2001; Waltz and McCafferty, 1979 Ephemeroptera Genus/Species Allen, 1978; Allen and Edmunds, Jr., 1961; Allen and Edmunds, Jr., 1962; Allen and Edmunds, Jr., 1963; Allen and Edmunds, Jr., 1965; Allen and Edmunds, Jr., 1976; Beaty, 2001; Bright, 2013; Burian, 2002; Burks, 1953; Edmunds, 1959; Edmunds and Allen, 1957; Edmunds and Allen, 1964; Edmunds et al., 1963; Edmunds et al., 1976; Jacobus and McCafferty, 2008; McCafferty, 1975; McCafferty, 2000; McCafferty et al., 2008; McCafferty and Randolph, 1998; Merritt and Cummins, 1996; Pescador and Berner, 1981; Pescador and Richard, 2004; Pfeiffer et al., 2008 Baetidae Genus/Species Bergman and Hilsenhoff, 1978; BugLab, 2003; Burian and Myers, 2011; Ide, 1937; Lehmkulh, 2009; Lowen and Flannagan, 1991; Lowen and Flannagan, 1992; Lugo -Ortiz and McCafferty, 1995; Lugo -Ortiz and McCafferty, 1998; Lugo -Ortiz et al., 1999; McCafferty and Jacobus, 2001; McCafferty and Waltz, 1990; McCafferty et al., 2005; Morihara ® Stantec Page 1 of 3 Taxonomic References and Identification Levels for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Groups Group Taxonomic Level Taxonomic References and McCafferty, 1979; Pfeiffer et al., 2008; Waltz, 1994 Ephemeridae Genus/Species McCafferty, 1974 Heptageniidae Genus/Species Bednarik and McCafferty, 1979; Bright, 2013; Burian et al., 2008; Tomka and Zurwerra, 1985; Webb and McCafferty, 2008 Odonata Genus/Species Bright, 2013; Merritt and Cummins, 1996; Walker, 1953; Walker, 1958; Walker and Corbet, 1975 Pecoptera Genus/Species Bright, 2013; Frison, 1935; Fullington and Stewart, 1980; Harper and Hynes, 1971 a; Harper and Hynes, 1971 b; Harper and Hynes, 1971 c; Harper and Hynes, 1971 d; Hitchcock, 1974; Merritt and Cummins, 1996; Peterson and van Eeckhaute, 1990; Pfeiffer et al., 2008; Ricker and Ross, 1975; Stewart and Oswood, 2006; Stewart and Stark, 2002 Hemiptera Species Bright, 2013; Brooks and Kelton, 1967; Cheng and Fernando, 1970; Epler, 2006; Hilsenhoff, 1981; Tinerella and Gundersen, 2005 Homoptera Order Merritt and Cummins, 1996 Trichoptera Genus/Species Flint, Jr., 1984; Floyd, 1995; Merritt and Cummins, 1996; Parker and Wiggins, 1987; Ross, 1944; Schefler and Wiggins, 1986; Schmude and Hilsenhoff, 1986; Schuster and Etnier, 1978; Wiggins, 1996; Wold, 1974 Coleoptera Genus/Species Archangelsky, 1997; Brown, 1976; Epler, 2006; Hilsenhoff and Schmude, 1992; Larson et al., 2000; Merritt and Cummins, 1996 Megaloptera Genus Merritt and Cummins, 1996 Lepidoptera Family/Genus Merritt and Cummins, 1996 Diptera Genus Adler et al., 2004; Carpenter and LaCasse, 1974; Johannsen, 1970; Kiefer et al., 1972; Loffler, 1986; McAlpine et al., 1981; McAlpine et al., 1987; McAlpine and Wood, 1989; Merritt and Cummins, 1996; Pfeiffer et al., 2008; Scether, 1970; Teskey, 1990; Wood et al., 1979 Chironomidae Genus/Species Boesel, 1985; Bolton, 2007; Ekrem, 2007; Epler, 2001; Jackson, 1977; Johannsen, 1970; Maschwitz and Cook, 2000; Oliver and Dillon, 1990; Oliver and Roussel, 1983; Roback, 1976; Simpson and Bode, 1980; Simpson et al., 1983; Wiederholm, 1983; Wiederholm, 1986; Wiederholm, 1989 Gastropoda Genus/Species Burch, 1982; Clarke, 1981; Jokinen, 1992; Prescott and Curteanu, 2004; Thompson, 2004; Thorp and ® Stantec Page 2 of 3 Taxonomic References and Identification Levels for Benthic Macroinvertebrate Groups Group Taxonomic Level Taxonomic References Covich, 2001; Wethington, 2004 Bivalvia Genus/Species Domm et al., 1993; Clarke, 1981; Fuller, 1974; Mackie et al., 1980; Metcalfe -Smith et al., 2005 Dreissenidae Species Domm et al., 1993 Sphaedclae Species Clarke, 1981 Mackie et al., 1980 Unionidae Species Clarke, 1981; Metcalfe -Smith et al., 2005 ® Stantec Page 3 of 3 TAXONOMIC REFERENCES Adler, P.H., Currie, D.C. and D.M. Wood. 2004. The Black Flies (Simuliidoe) of North America. Royal Ontario Museum, Cornell University Press, New York. 941 pp. Allen, R.K. 1978. The nymphs of North and Central American Leptohyphes (Ephemeroptera: Tricorythidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 71(4): 537-558. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds, Jr. 1961. A revision of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). II. The subgenus Caudatella. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 54(4): 603-612. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds Jr. 1961. A revision of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). III. The subgenus Attenuatella. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 34(4): 161-173. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds Jr. 1962. A revision of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). IV. The subgenus Dannella. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 35(3): 333-338. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds Jr. 1962. A revision of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). V. The subgenus Drunella in North America. Misc. Publ. Ent. Soc. Am. 3(5): 147-179. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds, Jr. 1963. A revision of the Genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae) VI. The Subgenus Serratella in North America. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 56(5): 583-600. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds, Jr. 1963. A revision of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). VII. The subgenus Eurylophella. The Canadian Entomologist 95(6): 597-623. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds, Jr. 1965. A review of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae) VIII. The subgenus Ephemerella in North America. Misc. Publ. Ent. Soc. Am. 4(6):243-282. Allen, R.K. and G.F. Edmunds Jr. 1976. A revision of the genus Ametropus in North America (Ephemeroptera: Ametropididae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 49(4): 625-635. Archangelsky, M. 1997. Studies on the biology, ecology, and systematics of the immature stages of New World Hydrophiloidea (Coleoptera: Staphyliniformia). Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey 12(1):1-207. ® Stantec Page 1 of 1 1 Beaty, S.R. 2001. The Ephemeroptera of North Carolina: A biologist's handbook with standard taxonomic effort levels. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, version 3.3. 57pp. Bednarik, A.F., and W.P. McCafferty. 1979. Biosystematic Revision of the Genus Stenonema (Ephemeroptera: Heptageniidae). Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, Bulletin 201, Department of Fisheries and Oceans. 73pp. Bergman, E.A. and W.L. Hilsenhoff. 1978. Baetis (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae) of Wisconsin. The Great Lakes Entomologist 11 (3): 125-135. Boesel, M.W. 1985. A brief review of the genus Polypedilum in Ohio, with keys to known stages of species occurring in Northeastern United States (Diptera, Chironomidae). The Ohio Journal of Science 85(5): 245-262. Bolton, M.J. 2007. Ohio EPA supplemental keys to the larval Chironomidae (Diptera) of Ohio and Ohio Chironomidae checklist. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, Ohio. 77pp. Bousfield, E.L. 1958. Fresh -Water Amphipod Crustaceans of Glaciated North America. The Canadian Field -Naturalist 72(2): 55-113. Bright, E. 2013. Aquatic Insects of Michigan. University of Michigan. http://insects.ummz.lsa.umich.edu/-ethanbr/aim/ Bright, E. and M.F. O'Brien. 1999. Odonata larvae of Michigan: keys for, and notes on, the dragon- and damsylfly larvae found in the state of. UMMZ - Insect Division. http://insects.ummz.lsa.umich.edu/MICHODO/test/HOME.HTM Brinkhurst, R.O. 1986. Guide to the Freshwater Aquatic Microdrile Oligochaetes of North America. Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Ottawa. Brinkhurst, R.O., and D.G. Cook. 1974. CHAPTER 5: Aquatic Earthworms (Annelida: Oligohaeta). Pp. 143-156 In: Hart, C.W. Jr., and S.L.H. Fuller (eds.). Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, New York and London. 389pp. Brooks, A.R. and L.A. Kelton. 1967. Aquatic and semiaquatic Heteroptera of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba (Hemiptera). Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada, No.51, Ottawa. 92pp. Brown, H.P. 1976. Aquatic Dryopoid Beetles (Coleoptera) of the United States. Water Pollution control Research Series 18050 ELDO4/72 (second printing), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 82pp. BugLab, Utah State University. 2003. BugLab key to Western Baetidae nymphs. http://www.usu.edu/buglab/SampleProcessing/LaboratoryProcedures/#item=74 (3 Stantec Page 2 of 1 1 Burch, J.B. 1982. Freshwater Snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of North America. United States Environmental Protection Agency EPA -600/3-82-026, Cincinnati, Ohio. 294pp. Burian, S.K. 2002. Taxonomy of Eurylophella coxalis (McDunnough) with notes on larval habitat and behavior (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 21(4): 602-615. Burian, S.K. and L.W. Myers. 2011. A new species of Acentrella Bengtsson (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae) from New York and New England (USA), redescription of the nymph of A. parvula (McDunnough), and key to known adult males of Nearctic Acentrella. Aquatic Insects 33(4): 305-334. Burian, S. K., B. I. Swartz, and P. C. Wick. 2008. Taxonomy of Epeorus frisoni (Burks) and key to New England species of Epeorus. Pp. 277-294 In: F. R. Hauer, J.A. Stanford, and R. L. Newell (eds.). International advances in the ecology, zoogeography and systematics of mayflies and stoneflies. University of California Publications in Entomology, Vol. 128, Berkeley. Burks, B.D. 1953. The Mayflies, or Ephemeroptera, of Illinois. Bulletin, Vol. 26, Article 1. 216pp. Carpenter, S.J. and W.J. LaCasse . 1974. Mosquitoes of North America. University of California Press, Berkley. 495pp. Catling, P.M. and V.R. Brownell. 2000. Damselflies and Dragonflies (Odonata) of Ontario: Resource guide and annotated list. ProResources, 2326 Scrivens Drive, Metcalfe, Ontario, Canada. 200pp. Cheng, L. and C.H. Fernando. 1970. The Water -Striders of Ontario (Heteroptera: Gerridae). Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publication of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. 23pp. Clarke, A.H. 1981. The Freshwater Molluscs of Canada. National Museum of Natural Sciences. Ottawa. 447pp. Cook, D.R. 1974. Water mite genera and subgenera. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute, Number 21, Michigan. 860pp. Cook, D.R. 1976. Contributions to the water mite fauna of North America. Contributions of the American Enomological Institute 11 (4): 1-148. Crocker, D.W., and D.W. Barr. 1968. Handbook of the Crayfishes in Ontario. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. 180pp. Davies, R.W. 1971. A key to the freshwater Hirudinoidea of Canada. J. Fish. Res. Bd. Canada 28: 543-552. (30 Stantec Page 3 of 1 1 Domm, S., R.W. McCauley, E. Koff, and J.D. Ackerman. 1993. Physiological and taxonomic separation of two Dreissenid mussels in the Laurentian Great Lakes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50(11): 2294-2297. Edmunds, G.F., Jr. 1959. Subgeneric groups within the mayfly genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 52(5): 543-547. Edmunds, G.F., Jr. and R.K. Allen. 1957. A checklist of the Ephemeroptera of North America North of Mexico. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. Vol 50, No. 4, pp. 317-324. Edmunds, G.F., Jr. and R.K. Allen, 1964. The Rocky Mountain Species of Epeorus (Iron) Eaton (Ephemeroptera: Heptageniidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 37: 275-288. Edmunds, G.F., Jr., R.K. Allen, and W.L. Peters. 1963. An annotated key to the nymphs of the families and subfamilies of mayflies (Ephemeroptera). University of Utah Biological Series. Vol. 13, No. 1. 55pp. Edmunds, G.F., Jr., Jensen, S.L. and L. Berner. 1976. The Mayflies of North and Central America. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Pp:51-292. Ekrem, T. 2007. A Taxonomic Revision of the Genus Stempellinella (Diptera: Chironomidae). Journal of Natural History. 41(21-24): 1367-1465. Epler, J.H. 2001. Identification Manual for the Larval Chironomidae (Diptera) of North and South Carolina. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Raleigh, NC. 526 pp. Epler, J.H. 2006. Identification manual for the aquatic and semi -aquatic Heteroptera of Florida. (Belostomatidae, Corixidae, Gelastocoridae, Gerridae, Hebridae, Hydrometridae, Mesoveliidae, Naucoridae, Nepidae, Notonectidae, Ochteridae, Pleidae, Saldidae, Veliidae). Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. 186pp. Epler, J.H. 2010. The water beetles of Florida - an identification manual for the families Chrysomelidae, Curculionidae, Dryopidae, Dytiscidae, Elmidae, Gyrinidae, Haliplidae, Helophoridae, Hydraenidae, Hydrochidae, Hydrophilidae, Noteridae, Psephenidae, Ptilodactylidae, and Scirtidae. Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee. 414pp. Fetzner, J.W., Jr. 2004. Key to the Astacidea. http://iz.carneoiemnh.or_ /q crayfish/Keys/index2.htm Flint, O.S. Jr. 1984. The Genus Brachycentrus in North America, with a Proposed Phylogeny of the Genera of Brachycentridae (Trichoptera). Smithsonian Contribution to Zoology, 398: 1-58. Stantec Page 4 of 1 1 Floyd, M.A. 1995. Larvae of the Caddisfly Genus Oecetis (Trichoptera: Leptoceridae) in North America. Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey, Ohio State University. Vol. 10, No. 3. 88pp. Frison, T.H. 1935. The Stoneflies, or Plecoptera, of Illinois. Bulletin, Vol, 20, Article IV. 471 pp. Fuller, S.L.H. 1974. CHAPTER 8: Clams and Mussels (Mollusca: Bivalvia). Pp: 215-273 In: Hart, C.W., Jr. and S.L.H. Fuller (eds). Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, New York and London. 389pp. Fullington, K.E. and K.W. Stewart. 1980. Nymphs of the stonefly genus Taeniopteryx (Plecoptera: Taeniopterygidae) of North America. Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society 53(2): 237-259. Harper, P.P. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1971 a. The Leuctridae of Eastern Canada (Insecta: Plecoptera). Can. J. Zool. 49(6):915-920. Harper, P.P. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1971 b. The Capniidae of Eastern Canada (Insecta: Plecoptera). Can. J. Zool. 49(6): 921-940. Harper, P.P. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1971c. The nymphs of the Taeniopterygidae of Eastern Canada (Insecta: Plecoptera). Can J. Zool. 49(6): 941-947. Harper, P.P. and H.B.N. Hynes. 1971d. The nymphs of the Nemouridae of Eastern Canada (Insecta: Plecoptera). Can. J. Zool. 49(8):1 129-1 142. Hillsenhoff, W.K. 1975. Aquatic Insects of Wisconsin: Generic Keys and Notes on Biology, Ecology and Distribution. Technical Bulletin No.89, Department of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin. 52pp. Hilsenhoff, W.L. 1995. Aquatic Insects of Wisconsin: Keys to Wisconsin genera and notes on biology, distribution and species. Publication Number 3 of the Natural History Museums Council, University of Wisconsin -Madison 79 pp. Hilsenhoff, W.L. and K.L. Schmude. 1992. Riffle beetles of Wisconsin (Coleoptera: Dryopidae, Elmidae, Lutrochidae, Psephenidae) with notes on distribution, habitat, and identification. The Great Lakes Entomologist 25(3): 191-213. Hitchcock, S.W. 1974. Guide to the Insects of Connecticut. Part VII. The Plecoptera or Stoneflies of Connecticut. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Bulletin No. 107, 262 pp. Hobbs, H.H., Jr. and E.T. Hall, Jr. 1974. CHAPTER 7: Crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidae). Pp: 195-214 In: Hart, C.W., Jr. and S.L.H. Fuller (eds). Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, New York and London. 389pp. (30 Stantec Page 5 of 1 1 Holsinger, J.R. 1976. The Freshwater Amphipod Crustaceans (Gammaridae) of North America. Water Pollution Control Research Series 18050 ELDO4/72 (second printing). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 89pp. Ide, F.P. 1937. Descriptions of eastern North American species of Baetine mayflies with particular reference to the nymphal stages. The Canadian Entomologist 11: 217-243. Jackson, G.A. 1977. Nearctic and Palearctic Paracladopelma Harnisch and Saetheria n. gen. (Diptera: Chironomidae). J. Fish. Res. Board Canada. 34(9): 1321-1359. Jacobus, L.M. and W.P. McCafferty. 2008. Revision of Ephemerellidae genera (Ephemeroptera). Transactions of the American Entomological Society 134(1+2): 185- 274. Johannsen, O.A. 1970. Aquatic Diptera. Eggs, Larvae, and Pupae of Aquatic Flies. Entomological Reprint Specialists, California. Jokinen, E.H. 1992. The freshwater snails (Mollusca: Gastropoda) of New York State. New York State Museum Bulletin 482, Albany, New York. 1 12pp. Kathman, R.D. and R.O. Brinkhurst. 1999. Guide to the Freshwater Oligochaetes of North America. Aquatic Resources Center, Tennessee. 264pp. Kenk, R. 1972. Freshwater Planarians (Turbellaria) of North America. Biota of Freshwater Ecosystems, Identification Manual No. 1, Smithsonian Institution, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 81 pp. Kenk, R. 1976. Freshwater Planarians (Turbellaria) of North America. Water Pollution Control Research Series 18050 ELDO2/72 (second printing). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 81 pp. Kenk, R. 1989. Revised List of the North American Freshwater Planarians (Platyhelminthes: Tricladida: Paludicola). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 476: 1- 10. Kiefer, F., G. Fryer, H. Bick, G. Breitig, and T. Grospietsch. 1972. Das Zooplankton der Binnengewdsser. Die Binnengewdsser, Stuttgart: Schweizerbart, Bd. 26: 257-280. Klemm, D.J. 1972. Freshwater Leeches (Annelida: Hirudinea) of North America. Biota of Freshwater Ecosystems, Identification Manual No.B, University of Michigan, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. Pp: 17-44. Klemm, D.J. 1982. Leeches (Annelida: Hirudinea) of North America. Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory (U.S.), Cincinnati, Ohio. 200pp. Klemm, D.J. 1991. Taxonomy and Pollution Ecology of the Great Lakes Region. Leeches (Annelida: Hirudinea). Michigan Academician 24:37- 103. ® Stantec Page 6 of 1 1 Larson, D.J., Y. Alarie, and R.E. Roughley. 2000. Predaceous Diving Beetles (Coleoptera: Dytiscidae) of the Nearctic Region, with emphasis on the fauna of Canada and Alaska. NRC Research Press. 982 pp. Lehmkulh, D. 2009. Key to the genera of Baetidae: Larvae. http://www.dennislehmkuhI.com/media/Baetidae$20Key$20to$20Genera$20Webb.pdf Loffler, H. 1986. An early meromictic stage in Lobsigensee (Switzerland) as evidenced by ostracods and Chaoborus. Hydrobiologia 143: 309-314. Lowen, R.G. and J.F. Flannagan. 1991. Four Manitoba species of Centroptilum Eaton (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae) with remarks on the genus. Pp: 189-206 In: Alba-Tercedor, J. and A. Sanchez -Ortega (eds). Overview and Strategies of Ephemeroptera and Plecoptera. Sandhill Crane Press, Gainesville, Florida. 588pp. Lowen, R.G. and J.F. Flannagan. 1992. Nymphs and imagoes of four North American species of Procloeon Bengtsson with description of a new species (Ephemeroptera, Baetidae). The Canadian Entomologist 124(1): 97-108. Lugo -Ortiz, C.R., and W.P. McCafferty. 1995. Taxonomy of the North and Central American species of Camelobaetidius (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Entomological News 106(4): 178-192. Lugo -Ortiz, C.R., and W.P. McCafferty. 1998. A new North American genus of Baetidae (Ephemeroptera) and key to Baefis complex genera. Entomological News 109(5): 345- 353. Lugo -Ortiz, C.R., W.P. McCafferty, and R.D. Waltz. 1999. Definition and reorganization of the genus Pseudocloeon (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae) with new species descriptions and combinations. Transactions of the American Entomological Society 125(1-2): 1-37. Mackie, G.L. 1993. Common Benthic Invertebrates, Zooplankton, Algae, and Macrophytes of the Speed River Watershed. Department of Zoology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario. 272pp. Maschwitz, D.E. and E.F. Cook. 2000. Revision of the Nearctic Species of the Genus Polypedilum Kieffer (Diptera: Chironomidae) in the Subgenera P. (Polypedilum) Kieffer and P. (Uresipedilum) Oyewo and Saether. Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey. Vol. 12, No. 3. Ohio State University. 135pp. McAlpine, J.F., B.V. Peterson, G.E. Shewell, H.J. Teskey, J.R. Vockeroth, and D.M. Wood. 1981. Manual of Nearctic Diptera, Volume 1. Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Monograph No.27. 674pp. McAlpine, J.F. (ed), B.V. Peterson, G.E. Shewell, H.J. Teskey, J.R. Vockeroth, and D.M. Wood. 1987. Manual of Nearctic Diptera, Volume 2. Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Monograph No.28. (pp: 675-1332) 658pp. (30 Stantec Page 7 of 1 1 McAlpine, J.F. (ed), and D.M. Wood. 1989. Manual of Nearctic Diptera, Volume 3. Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Monograph No.32: 249pp. McCafferty, W.P. 1975. The burrowing mayflies (Ephemeroptera: Ephemeroidea) of the United States. Transactions of the American Entomological Society, Vol. 101: 447-504. McCafferty, W.P. 2000. The Mayflies of North America: Species List. McCafferty, W.P. and L.M. Jacobus. 2001. Revisions to Plauditus cestus and P. gloveri (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Entomological News 112(5): 305-310. McCafferty, W.P., L.M. Jacobus, J.M. Webb, and M.D. Meyer. 2008. Insecta, Ephemeroptera: Range extensions and new records for Ontario and Canada. Check List 4(4): 445-448. McCafferty, W.P. and R.P. Randolph. 1998. Canada mayflies: a faunistic compendium. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Ontario 129:47-97. McCafferty, W.P. and R.D. Waltz. 1990. Revisionary synopsis of the Baetidae (Ephemeroptera) of North and Middle America. Transactions of the American Entomological Society. 116(4): 769-799. McCafferty, W.P., R.D. Waltz, J.M. Webb, and L.M. Jacobus. 2005. Revision of Heterocloeon McDunnough (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Journal of Insect Science 5: 1- 11. Metcalfe -Smith, J., A. MacKenzie, I. Carmichael, and D. McGoldrick. 2005. Photo Field Guide to the Freshwater Mussels of Ontario. St. Thomas Field Naturalist Club Inc. St. Thomas, Ontario. 60pp. Merritt, R.W. and K.W. Cummins (eds.). 1996. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America. 3rd edition. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co. Dubuque, Iowa. 862 pp. Morihara, D.K. and W.P. McCafferty. 1979. The Baetis larvae of North America (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. 105(2): 139-221. Oliver, D.R. and M.E. Dillon. 1990. A Catalog of Nearctic Chironomidae. Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Publication 1857/13, Ottawa. 89pp. Oliver, D.R. and M.E. Roussel. 1983. Redescription of Brillia Kieffer (Diptera: Chironomidae) with descriptions of nearctic species. The Canadian Entomologist 115(3): 257-279. Parker, C.R. and G.B. Wiggins. 1987. Revision of the Caddisfly Genus Psilotreto (Trichoptera: Odontoceridae). Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publication of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. Vol. 144: 1- 55. ® Stantec Page 8 of 1 1 Pescador, M.L. and L. Berner. 1981. The mayfly family Baetiscidae (Ephemeroptera). Part II. Biosystematics of the genus Baetisca. Trans. Amer. Ent. Soc. 107(3): 163-228. Pescador, M.L. and B.A. Richard. 2004. Guide to the mayfly (Ephemeroptera) nymphs of Florida. Unpublished document from the State of Florida, Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water Resource Management, Tallahassee. Peterson, H.R. and L. van Eeckhaute. 1990. Distributions of stonefly (Plecoptera) and caddisfly (Trichoptera) species in three stream systems in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, Canada, with reference to stream acidity. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1720: iii + 42p. Pfeiffer, J., E. Kosnicki, M. Bilder, B. Marshall, and W. Davis. 2008. Taxonomic aids for Mid - Atlantic benthic macroinvertebrates - Ephemeroptera: Baetidae, Plecoptera: Capniidae/Leuctridae, Diptera: Simuliidae. United States Environmental Protection Agency EPA -260-R-08-014, Washington, DC. 48pp. Prescott, D.R.C. and M.M. Curteanu. 2004. Survey of Aquatic Gastropods in the Central Parkland Subregion of Alberta. Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Species at Risk Report No. 92, Edmonton, AB. 63pp. Ricker, W.E. and H.H. Ross. 1975. Synopsis of the Branchypterinae, (Insecta: Plecoptera: Taeniopterygidae). Can. J. Zool. 53(2): 132-153. Roback, S.S. 1974. Insects (Arthropoda: Insecta). Pp: 313-376 In: Hart, C.W.Jr. and S.L.H. Fuller (eds). Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press. New York and London. 389pp. Roback, S.S. 1976. The Immature Chironomids of the Eastern United States I. Introduction and Tanypodinae-Coelotanypodini. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 127(14): 147-201. Ross, H.H. 1944. The Caddis Flies, or Trichoptera, of Illinois. Bulletin, Vol. 23, Article 1. 326pp. Sawyer, R.T. 1974. CHAPTER 4: Leeches (Annelida: Hirudinea). Pp 81-1421n: Hart, C.W. Jr., and S.L.H. Fuller (eds.). Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, New York and London. 389pp. Schefler, P.W. and G.B. Wiggins. 1986. A Systematic Study of the Nearctic Larvae of the Hydropsyche morosa Group (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae). Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publication of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto. 94pp. Schmude, K.L. and W.L. Hilsenhoff. 1986. Biology, ecology, larval taxonomy, and distribution of Hydropsychidae (Trichoptera) in Wisconsin. The Great Lakes Entomologist 19(3): 123-146. (30 Stantec Page 9 of 1 1 Schuster, G.A. and D.A. Etnier. 1978. A manual for the identification of the larvae of the caddisfly genera Hydropsyche Pictet and Symphitopsyche Ulmer in eastern and central North America (Trichoptera : Hydropsychidae). United States Environmental Protection Agency Report 600/4-78-060, Cincinnati, Ohio. 129pp. Simpson, K.W. and R.W. Bode. 1980. Common Larvae of Chironomidae (Diptera) from New York State Streams and Rivers. New York State Museum, Bulletin No. 439. Albany, New York. 105pp. Simpson, K.W., R.W. Bode and P. Albu. 1983. Keys for the Genus Cricotopus: Adapted from "Revision Der Gattung Cricotopus Van Der Wulp and Ihrer Verwandten (Diptera, Chironomidae). New York State Museum, Bulletin No. 450. The University of the State of New York, Albany, New York. 133pp. Smith, D.G. 2001. Pennak's Freshwater Invertebrates of the United States. 4t" edition. Porifera to Crustacea. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Toronto. 638pp. Stewart, K.W. and Oswood, M.W. 2006. The Stoneflies (Plecoptera) of Alaska and Western Canada. The Caddis Press, Columbus Ohio. 325pp. Stewart, K.W. and B.P Stark. 2002. Nymphs of North American Stonefly Genera (Plecoptera). 2nd edition. The Caddis Press, Columbus Ohio. 51 Opp. Stewart, K.W. and B.P. Stark. 1988. Nymphs of North American Stonefly Genera (Plecoptera). Thomas Say Foundation, Entomol. Soc. Amer. 12: 1-460. Scether, O. A. 1970. Nearctic and Palaearctic Chaoborus (Diptera: Chaoboridae). Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Bulletin 174, Ottawa. 57pp. Teskey, H.J. 1990. THE INSECTS AND ARACHNIDS OF CANADA, PART 16. The horse flies and deer flies of Canada and Alaska - Diptera: Tabanidae. Research Branch Agriculture Canada, Publication 1838. 381 pp. Thompson, F.G. 2004. An Identification Manual for the Freshwater Snails of Florida. Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. 96pp. Thorp, J.H., and A.P. Covich (eds.). 2001. Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. 2nd edition. Academic Press, San Diego, California. 1056pp. Tinerella, P.R. and R.W. Gundersen. 2005. The Water Boatmen (Insecta: Heteroptera: Corixidae) of Minnesota. Schafer -Post Foundation, Publication number 23. North Dakota. 121 pp. Tomka, I. and A. Zurwerra. 1985. Key to the genera of Heptageniidae (Ephemeroptera) of the Holarctic, Oriental and Ethiopian region. Entomologische Berichte Luzern, No. 14. Pp: 113-126. ® Stantec Page 10 of 1 1 Walker, E.M. 1953. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska. Vol. 1: Part 1: General. Part II: The Zygoptera - Damselflies. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, Ontario. 292pp. Walker, E.M. 1958. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska. Vol. 2: Part III: The Anisoptera - Four Families. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, Ontario. 318pp. Walker, E.M. and P.S. Corbet. 1975. The Odonata of Canada and Alaska. Vol. 3: Part III: The Anisoptera - Three Families. University of Toronto Press. Toronto, Ontario. 308pp. Waltz, R.D. 1994. Key to the larvae of Baetid genera known east of the Mississippi River (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Indiana Department of Natural Resources, unpublished. Waltz, R.D. and W.P. McCafferty. 1979. Freshwater Springtails (Hexapoda: Collembola) of North America. Purdue University Agricultural Experiment Station, West Lafayette, Inidana. Webb, J.M. and W.P. McCafferty. 2008. Heptageniidae of the World. Part II: Key to the Genera. Canadian Journal of Arthropod Identification No. 7. 55pp. Wethington, A.R. 2004. Family Physidae. Purdue University. Wiederholm, T. (ed.). 1983. Chironomidae of the Holarctic Region: Keys and Diagnoses. Part 1. Larvae. Entomologica Scandinavica Supplement No. 19. 457pp. Wiederholm, T. (Ed.). 1986. Chironomidae of the Holarctic Region: Keys and Diagnoses. Part 2. Pupae. Entomologica Scandinavica Supplement No. 28. 482pp. Wiederholm, T. (Ed.). 1989. Chironomidae of the Holarctic Region: Keys and Diagnoses. Part 3. Adult males. Entomologica Scandinavica Supplement No. 34. 532pp. Williams, W.D. 1976. Freshwater Isopods (Asellidae) of North America. Water Pollution Control Research Series 18050 ELDO5/72 (second printing). United States Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio. 45pp. Wiggins, G.B. 1996. Larvae of North American Caddisfly Genera (Trichoptera). 2nd edition. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, ON. 457pp. Wold, J.L. 1974. Systematics of the Genus Rhyacophila (Trichoptera: Rhyacophilidae) in Western North America with Special Reference to the Immature Stages. Abstract of the Master of Science thesis submitted to Oregon State University. 229pp. Wood, D.M., P.T. Dang, and R.A. Ellis. 1979. THE INSECTS AND ARACHNIDS OF CANADA, PART 6. The Mosquitoes of Canada - Diptera: Culicidae. Agriculture Canada, Research Branch, Publication 1686. 390pp. ® Stantec Page 1 1 of 1 1 TABLE A2-1: BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED FROM PORT BURWELL SCH, 2015. (densities expressed per mZ) Stantec Page 1 of 3 Hilsennott big er ree a ions rans lona a io Lake Lrie a ions Tolerance 1131 15 113115 113115 –14--F-1-5] Station Value 11 1 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 2 10 1 3 12 13 ROUNDWORMS P. Nematoda 5 - - - 29 - 115 57 57 - - - - - ANNELIDS P. Annelida WORMS Cl. Oliqochaeta F. Naididae Nais 8 101 Veidovskvella intermedia 6 29 F. Tubificidae Limnodrilus cervix 10 1078 - - 9253 1 135 2974 661 - - - Limnodrilus claparedianus 10 1078 11236 2443 2644 - - 1997 1580 - - Limnodrilus hoffineisteri 10 5244 2687 6236 1954 5287 5675 - 1336 1595 14 - Potamothrix bavaricus 8 1494 1078 - 977 2644 - 2241 661 - - immatures with hair chaetae 10 - - 1250 489 - 3405 - - - - immatures without hair chaetae 10 11997 7529 12486 6351 13218 18175 13405 11954 4770 158 43 43 144 F. Spamanophilidae Sparganophilus - 57 - - - - - - - - - - - LEECHES Cl. Hirudinea F. Erpobdellidae Mooreobdella microstoma 10 - 14 ARTHROPODS P. Arthropoda MITES Cl. Arachnida O. Acarina 6 14 - - 57 14 SEED SHRIMPS CI.Ostracoda 8 - - 57 - - WATER SCUDS O. Amphipoda F. Cranqonvctidae Crangonvx 6 - 57 F. Gammaridae Gammarus fasciatus 6 - 115 14 - F. Pontoporeiidae Diporeia - - 14 INSECTS Cl. Insecta BEETLES O. Coleoptera F. Elmidae Dubiraohia larvae 6 - 172 172 57 172 115 172 Macronvchus glabratus 5 57 - - - - - - 14 Stenelmis larvae 5 - 29 MAYFLIES O. Ephemeroofera Stantec Page 1 of 3 TABLE A2-1: BENTHIC MAC ROI NVERTEBRATES COLLECTED FROM PORT BURWELL SCH, 2015. (densities expressed per m) ® Stantec Page 2 of 3 Hilsenhoff Big er ree a ions IronsTional bTaTio Lake Erie Stations Tolerance IBI 15 JBI 15 JBI 15 –14--F-1-5] Station Value 11 4 5 1 6 1 7 1 1 1 8 9 2 10 1 3 12 1 13 1 F. Ephemeridae Hexaaenia 6 - 29 14 - - 29 14 14 - - - - - - ALDERFLIES F. Sialidae Sialis 4 - - - 29 - - - - - STONEFLIES O. Plecoptera F. Capnlidae immature 3 - - 14 - - F. Taeniopterycildae Taeniootervx meteaui 2 - 29 - - - - - BUGS O. Hemiptera F. Corixidae Trichocorixa kanza 3 - - - 14 - - - - CADDISFLIES O. Trichoptera F. Hydropsychidae Hvdroosvche soarna 6 - 57 - - - - - - - TRUE FLIES O. Diptera indeterminate - - - - 14 14 - - - BITING -MIDGE F. Ceratopwonidae Culicoides 10 - 115 - - - - - 57 - 29 - - - Mallochohelea 6 - - - 115 - 57 172 57 - 101 - - - Probezzia 6 - - 57 - - - - 57 - - - - - MIDGES F. Chironomidae chironomid pupae - - 57 - - - - - 14 - - - S.F. Chironominae Chironomus 10 115 57 230 144 747 690 172 402 - 14 - - Crvotochironomus 8 57 - 57 287 57 402 287 172 86 - - 14 14 Glvototendioes 10 - - 57 - - - - - - - 14 - - Microchironomus 8 - - - - - - - - - 14 Microosectra 7 - - - - 57 - - - - - - Paralauterborniella 8 - - - 287 - - - - - 14 - - Phaenoosectra 7 115 57 345 1207 345 345 287 115 43 29 - - Polvoedilum halterale 6 690 - 345 1034 460 345 805 115 158 - - - Stenochironomus 5 - 57 - - - - - - - - - Tanvtarsus 6 - - - - 57 - - S.F. Orthocladiinae Cricotoous 7 - - - 115 - - - Diolocladius 8 - - - - - 14 - Eukiefferiella 4 - 57 - - - - - - Heterotrissocladius 4 - - - - 57 - 14 - Hvdrobaenus 8 - - - 201 - - - - - Orthocladius 6 - - - - - - 14 - - Parakiefferiella 4 - - - 57 57 - - - - Parametriocnemus 5 - - - 57 - - - - S.F. Prodiamesinae ® Stantec Page 2 of 3 TABLE A2-1: BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES COLLECTED FROM PORT BURWELL SCH, 2015. (densities expressed per mZ) TOTAL NUMBER OF ORGANISMS TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA Bold entries excluded from taxa count ® Stantec 19828 15560 32601 16034 35417 30963 21394 18261 8376 9 19 15 20 15 16 21 18 14 603 29 43 14 57 172 16 2 1 1 2 3 Page 3 of 3 Hilsennott big er ree a ions rans lona a io Lake Lrie a ions Tolerance JBI 15 113115 113115 —14--F-1-5] Station Value 11 4 5 6 7 1 8 9 1 2 10 3 12 13 Odontomesa 5 - - - - - - - 14 - - - - S.F. Tanvoodinae Natarsia 8 57 - - - - - - - Procladius 9 - 920 57 144 460 230 287 230 29 Thienemannimvia complex 6 57 - - - - - - - F. Tabanidae Chrysops 5 57 402 14 43 - F. Tipulidae Pilaria 7 - - - - 14 MOLLUSCS P. Mollusca CLAMS Cl. Bivalvia F. Dreissenidae Dreissena oolvmoroha 8 - 14 F. Sphaeriidae Pisidium (Cyclocalyx) 6 72 14 172 29 - (Sohaerium) Musculium transversum 6 57 115 72 172 F. Unionidae Leotodea fragilis 6 - - 14 - TOTAL NUMBER OF ORGANISMS TOTAL NUMBER OF TAXA Bold entries excluded from taxa count ® Stantec 19828 15560 32601 16034 35417 30963 21394 18261 8376 9 19 15 20 15 16 21 18 14 603 29 43 14 57 172 16 2 1 1 2 3 Page 3 of 3 TABLE A3-1: PERCENT RECOVERY OF BENTHIC MACROINVERTEBRATES FROM SAMPLES COLLECTED AT PORT BURWELL SCH STATIONS (2015) Station Number of Organisms Number of Organisms Recovered in Re -sort Percent Recovery BI -15-02-1 119 4 96.7% BI -15-02-2 143 1 99.3% BI -15-02-3 306 10 96.8% BI -15-11-1 139 0 100.0% BI -15-11-2 94 2 97.9% BI -15-11-3 107 3 97.3% Average % 98.0% ® Stantec Page 1 of 2 TABLE A3-2: SAMPLE FRACTIONS SORTED FROM PORT BURWELL SCH STATIONS (2015) Station Fraction Sorted Station Fraction Sorted BI -15-11 1/4 BI -15-2 Whole BI -15-4 1/4 BI -15-10 Whole BI -15-5 1/4 BI -15-3 Whole BI -15-6 1/2 BI -15-12 Whole BI -15-7 1/4 BI -15-13 Whole BI -15-1 1/4 BI -15-14 Whole BI -15-8 1/4 BI -15-15 Whole BI -15-9 1/4 QA/QC Notes Pupae were not counted toward total number of taxa unless they were the sole representative of their taxa group. ® Stantec Page 2 of 2 SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix K Benthic Community Structure Analysis Figures September 11, 2015 Benthic Community Structure Analysis Figures ® Stantec K.1 Stantec 40000 35000 E 30000 Cr 25000 E p 20000 wo L O .y 15000 c p 10000 5000 APPENDIX K ERA Fiqures F, 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 Manganese Hazard Quotients (SELs) Figure 1 Density of Benthic Organisms (Abundance) as a function of Manganese Hazard Quotients 25.00 20.00 M xM 10.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 Manganese Hazard Quotients (SELs) Figure 2 Taxa Richness of Benthic Organisms (Diversity) as a function of Manganese Hazard Quotients Page 1 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX K ERA Fiqures 40000 ♦ 35000 30000 a• 25000 E 20000 ao L > 15000 .y c p 10000 5000 0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Sum of PAH and DDT HQs (PELs) Figure 3 Density of Benthic Organisms (Abundance) as a function of the sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients 25.00 20.00 M fx6 10.00 5.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Sum of PAH and DDT HQs (PELs) Figure 4 Taxa Richness of Benthic Organisms (Diversity) as a function of the sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients Page 2 Stantec Consulting Ltd. ♦ Figure 3 Density of Benthic Organisms (Abundance) as a function of the sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients 25.00 20.00 M fx6 10.00 5.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 Sum of PAH and DDT HQs (PELs) Figure 4 Taxa Richness of Benthic Organisms (Diversity) as a function of the sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients Page 2 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX K ERA Fiqures Figure 5 Manganese Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of clay (%) 0.70 0.60 0.50 RZ = 0.9118 J W N cl 0.40 x d 0.30 c N a 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 % Silt Figure 6 Manganese Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of silt (%) Page 3 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX K ERA Fiqures 0.70 0.60 0.50 J W H ar 0.40 x v c 0.30 ao t c 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 TOC (mg/kg) Figure 7 Manganese Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of Total Organic Carbon (mg/kg) Figure 8 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of clay (%) Page 4 Stantec Consulting Ltd. RZ =♦.7246 ♦ H Figure 7 Manganese Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of Total Organic Carbon (mg/kg) Figure 8 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of clay (%) Page 4 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX K ERA Fiqures Figure 9 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of silt (70) 3.00 2.50 W J a Cr 2.00 x 0 1.50 c x a 1.00 0 E 0 �' 0.50 M KII 3.00 RZ = 0.6748 2.50 N J W a 2.00 C x 1.50 0 0 v c 1.00 = a a ° 0.50 E H 0.000 0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70 .0 -0.50 Silt (40) Figure 9 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of silt (70) 3.00 2.50 W J a Cr 2.00 x 0 1.50 c x a 1.00 0 E 0 �' 0.50 M KII RZ = 0.6748 N Figure 9 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the proportion of silt (70) 3.00 2.50 W J a Cr 2.00 x 0 1.50 c x a 1.00 0 E 0 �' 0.50 M KII 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 TOC (mg/k Figure 10 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the Total Organic Carbon (mg/kg) Page 5 Stantec Consulting Ltd. N 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 TOC (mg/k Figure 10 Sum of PAH and DDT Hazard Quotients as a result of the Total Organic Carbon (mg/kg) Page 5 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX K ERA Figures 1.20 1.00 axi 0.80 c 0.60 c d W JA 0.40 c 0 V) CL in 0.20 0.00 0. 00 -0.20 % Clay Figure 11 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Clay 1.20 1.00 0 5.00 10.00 15.00 R�� X775 25. Figure 11 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Clay Figure 12 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt Page 6 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 1.20 1.00 0.80 W M 0 10.0 c 40.0 50�z 70 0.60 c a W 0.40 c 0 CL E 0.20 in 0.00 0 .0 -0.20 % Silt Figure 12 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt Page 6 Stantec Consulting Ltd. 0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50�z 70 Figure 12 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and % Silt Page 6 Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec APPENDIX K ERA Fiqures Figure 13 Correlation between Simpson's Evenness Index and Total Organic Carbon (mg/kg) Page 7 Stantec Consulting Ltd. SITE-SPECIFIC HUMAN HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF SEDIMENT AT PORT BURWELL Appendix L ProUCL 5.0 Outputs September 11, 2015 Appendix L ProUCL 5.0 Outputs ® Stantec L.1 APPENDIX L Stantec ProUCL 5.0 Outputs SEDIMENT PROUCL 95%UCLM Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1 UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non -Detects 2 3 User Selected Options 4 Date/Time of Computation 7/9/2015 7:54:31 PM 5 From File sed_input.xls 6 Full Precision OFF 7 Confidence Coefficient 95% 8 Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000 9 10 11 Moisture Content 12 13 General Statistics 14 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 15 Number of Missing Observations 0 16 Minimum 17 Mean 24.3 17 Maximum 36 Median 22.5 18 SD 5.579 Std. Error of Mean 1.764 19 Coefficient of Variation 0.23 Skewness 1.101 20 21 Normal GOF Test 22 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.914 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 23 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 24 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.192 Lilliefors GOF Test 25 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 26 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 27 28 Assuming Normal Distribution 29 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 30 95% Student's -t UCL 27.53 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 27.86 31 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 27.64 32 33 Gamma GOF Test 34 A -D Test Statistic 0.334 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 35 5% A -D Critical Value 0.725 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 36 K -S Test Statistic 0.176 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 37 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 38 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 39 40 Gamma Statistics 41 k hat (MILE) 22.97 k star (bias corrected MILE) 16.15 42 Theta hat (MILE) 1.058 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 1.505 43 nu hat (MILE) 459.4 nu star (bias corrected) 322.9 44 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 24.3 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 6.047 45 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 282.3 46 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 275.7 47 48 Assuming Gamma Distribution 49 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 27.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 28.46 50 51 Lognormal GOF Test 52 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.96 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 53 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 54 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 55 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 56 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 57 58 Lognormal Statistics 59 Minimum of Logged Data 2.833 Mean of logged Data 3.169 60 Maximum of Logged Data 3.584 SD of logged Data 0.217 61 62 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 63 95% H -UCL 27.92 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29.3 64 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 31.57 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 34.73 65 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 40.93 66 67 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 68 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 69 70 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 71 95% CLT UCL 27.2 95% Jackknife UCL 27.53 72 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 27.07 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 29.02 73 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 43.51 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 27.3 74 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 27.7 75 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 29.59 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 31.99 76 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 35.32 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 41.85 77 78 Suggested UCL to Use 79 95% Student's -t UCL 27.53 80 81 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 82 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 83 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 84 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 85 86 87 TKN 88 89 General Statistics 90 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 16 91 Number of Missing Observations 0 92 Minimum 66 Mean 394.7 93 Maximum 961 Median 356 94 SD 266.8 Std. Error of Mean 66.69 95 Coefficient of Variation 0.676 Skewness 0.805 96 97 Normal GOF Test 98 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.919 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 99 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 100 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.156 Lilliefors GOF Test 101 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 102 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 103 104 Assuming Normal Distribution A B C D E F G H I J K L 105 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 106 95% Student's -t UCL 511.6 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 518.7 107 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 513.8 108 109 Gamma GOF Test 110 A -D Test Statistic 0.232 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 111 5% A -D Critical Value 0.75 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 112 K -S Test Statistic 0.0983 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 113 5% K -S Critical Value 0.218 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 114 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 115 116 Gamma Statistics 117 k hat (MLE) 2.105 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.752 118 Theta hat (MLE) 187.5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 225.3 119 nu hat (MLE) 67.35 nu star (bias corrected) 56.06 120 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 394.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 298.2 121 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 39.85 122 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 38.3 123 124 Assuming Gamma Distribution 125 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 555.2 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 577.7 126 127 Lognormal GOF Test 128 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.944 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 129 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 130 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.132 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 131 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 132 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 133 134 Lognormal Statistics 135 Minimum of Logged Data 4.19 Mean of logged Data 5.722 136 Maximum of Logged Data 6.868 SD of logged Data 0.798 137 138 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 139 95% H -UCL 690.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 672.5 140 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 791.5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 956.6 141 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1281 142 143 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1441 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 145 146 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 147 95% CLT UCL 504.4 95% Jackknife UCL 511.6 148 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 499.3 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 543 149 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 526.1 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 505.3 150 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 519.8 151 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 594.8 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 685.4 152 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 811.2 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1058 153 154 Suggested UCL to Use 155 95% Student's -t UCL 511.6 156 A I B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K I L 157 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 158 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 159 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 160 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 161 162 163 TOC 164 165 General Statistics 166 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12 167 Number of Missing Observations 0 168 Minimum 2000 Mean 7406 169 Maximum 14000 Median 5550 170 SD 4388 Std. Error of Mean 1097 171 Coefficient of Variation 0.592 Skewness 0.397 172 173 Normal GOF Test 174 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.876 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 175 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 176 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.231 Lilliefors GOF Test 177 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 178 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 179 180 Assuming Normal Distribution 181 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 182 95% Student's -t UCL 9329 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 9327 183 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 9347 184 185 Gamma GOF Test 186 A -D Test Statistic 0.58 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 187 5% A -D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 188 K -S Test Statistic 0.193 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 189 5% K -S Critical Value 0.217 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 190 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 191 192 Gamma Statistics 193 k hat (MILE) 2.823 k star (bias corrected MILE) 2.335 194 Theta hat (MILE) 2624 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 3172 195 nu hat (MILE) 90.32 nu star (bias corrected) 74.72 196 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7406 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 4847 197 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 55.81 198 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 53.95 199 200 Assuming Gamma Distribution 201 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50) 9915 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 10257 202 203 Lognormal GOF Test 204 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.917 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 205 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 206 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.159 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 207 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 208 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 209 210 Lognormal Statistics 211 Minimum of Logged Data 7.601 Mean of logged Data 8.723 212 Maximum of Logged Data 9.547 SD of logged Data 0.657 213 214 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 215 95% H -UCL 11117 90%Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11385 216 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13145 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15587 217 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 20385 218 219 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 220 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 221 222 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 223 95% CLT UCL 9211 95% Jackknife UCL 9329 224 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9199 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 9610 225 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 9174 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9194 226 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 9306 227 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10697 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12188 228 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14256 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18320 229 230 Suggested UCL to Use 231 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 10257 232 233 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 234 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 235 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 236 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 237 238 Toluene 239 240 General Statistics 241 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 3 242 Number of Detects 3 Number of Non -Detects 13 243 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 244 Minimum Detect 0.03 Minimum Non -Detect 0.02 245 Maximum Detect 0.1 Maximum Non -Detect 0.02 246 Variance Detects 0.00163 Percent Non -Detects 81.25% 247 Mean Detects 0.0533 SD Detects 0.0404 248 Median Detects 0.03 CV Detects 0.758 249 Skewness Detects 1.732 Kurtosis Detects N/A 250 Mean of Logged Detects -3.105 SD of Logged Detects 0.695 251 252 Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values. 253 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 254 255 256 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 257 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 258 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 259 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 260 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 261 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 262 263 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2641 Mean 0.0263 Standard Error of Mean 0.00592 265 SD 0.0193 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 266 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0366 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 267 95% KM (z) UCL 0.036 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 268 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.044 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.052 269 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0632 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0851 270 271 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 272 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 273 274 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 275 k hat (MLE) 3.029 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 276 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0176 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 277 nu hat (MLE) 18.18 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 278 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 279 280 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 281 k hat (KM) 1.845 nu hat (KM) 59.05 282 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 283 Approximate Chi Square Value (59.05, a) 42.38 Adjusted Chi Square Value (59.05, R) 40.77 284 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0366 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.038 285 286 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 287 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 288 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 289 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 290 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 291 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 292 293 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2941 Mean in Original Scale 0.0123 Mean in Log Scale -5.953 295 SD in Original Scale 0.0253 SD in Log Scale 1.931 296 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0234 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0239 297 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0292 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0424 298 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.146 299 3001 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 301 KM Mean (logged) -3.761 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0308 302 KM SD (logged) 0.399 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.954 303 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.122 304 305 DL/2 Statistics 306 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 307 Mean in Original Scale 0.0181 Mean in Log Scale -4.324 308 SD in Original Scale 0.0229 SD in Log Scale 0.656 309 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0281 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0239 310 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 311 13121 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 313 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 314 315 Suggested UCL to Use 316 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0366 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 317 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 318 319 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 320 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 321 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3221 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 323 324 PHC F2 325 326 General Statistics 327 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 3 328 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 15 329 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 330 331 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 332 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 333 334 The data set for variable PHC F2 was not processed! 335 336 337 PHC F3 338 339 General Statistics 340 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 9 341 Number of Detects 7 Number of Non -Detects 9 342 Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 343 Minimum Detect 19 Minimum Non -Detect 10 344 Maximum Detect 180 Maximum Non -Detect 50 345 Variance Detects 2960 Percent Non -Detects 56.25% 346 Mean Detects 60.86 SD Detects 54.41 347 Median Detects 51 CV Detects 0.894 348 Skewness Detects 2.263 Kurtosis Detects 5.595 349 Mean of Logged Detects 3.859 SD of Logged Detects 0.721 350 351 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 352 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.688 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 353 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 354 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.407 Lilliefors GOF Test 355 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 356 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 357 358 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 359 Mean 37.33 Standard Error of Mean 11.46 360 SD 40.33 95% KM (BCA) UCL 55.88 361 95% KM (t) UCL 57.41 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 57.4 362 95% KM (z) UCL 56.17 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 72.64 363 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 71.7 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 87.27 364 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1 108.9 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 151.3 A B C D E F G H I J K L 365 366 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 367 A -D Test Statistic 0.625 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 368 5% A -D Critical Value 0.714 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 369 K -S Test Statistic 0.334 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 370 5% K -S Critical Value 0.315 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 371 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level 372 373 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 374 k hat (MLE) 2.156 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.327 375 Theta hat (MLE) 28.23 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 45.85 376 nu hat (MLE) 30.18 nu star (bias corrected) 18.58 377 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 60.86 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 52.83 378 379 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 380 k hat (KM) 0.857 nu hat (KM) 27.41 381 Approximate Chi Square Value (27.41, a) 16.47 Adjusted Chi Square Value (27.41, R) 15.51 382 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n-50) 62.12 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 65.97 383 384 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 385 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 386 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 387 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 388 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 389 Minimum 0.01 Mean 31.07 390 Maximum 180 Median 20.91 391 SD 44.87 CV 1.444 392 k hat (MLE) 0.267 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.258 393 Theta hat (MLE) 116.5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 120.2 394 nu hat (MLE) 8.538 nu star (bias corrected) 8.27 395 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 31.07 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 61.12 396 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 397 Approximate Chi Square Value (8.27, a) 2.893 Adjusted Chi Square Value (8.27, R) 2.542 398 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 88.84 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 101.1 399 400 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 401 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.895 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 402 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 403 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.286 Lilliefors GOF Test 404 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 405 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 406 407 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 408 Mean in Original Scale 35.91 Mean in Log Scale 3.176 409 SD in Original Scale 41.86 SD in Log Scale 0.887 410 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 54.25 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 54.55 411 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 62.09 95% Bootstrap t UCL 75.19 412 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 63.4 413 414 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 415 KM Mean (logged) 3.248 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 59.72 14161 KM SD (logged) 0.814 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.431 A B C I D I E F G H I J K L 417 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.27 418 419 DU2 Statistics 4201 DU2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 421 Mean in Original Scale 38.19 Mean in Log Scale 3.298 422 SD in Original Scale 40.65 SD in Log Scale 0.859 423 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 56 95% H -Stat UCL 68.02 424 DU2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 425 426 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 427 Detected Data appear Approximate Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 428 429 Suggested UCL to Use 430 95% KM (t) UCL 57.41 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 101.1 431 95% Adjusted Gamma KM -UCL 65.97 432 433 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 434 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 435 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 436 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 437 438 PHC F4 439 440 General Statistics 441 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 4 442 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 15 443 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 3 444 445 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 446 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 447 448 The data set for variable PHC F4 was not processed! 449 450 451 452 Aluminum 453 454 General Statistics 455 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 16 456 Number of Missing Observations 0 457 Minimum 1300 Mean 3919 458 Maximum 9600 Median 3150 459 SD 2519 Std. Error of Mean 629.8 460 Coefficient of Variation 0.643 Skewness 1.064 461 462 Normal GOF Test 463 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.871 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 464 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 465 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.207 Lilliefors GOF Test 466 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 467 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 468 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 469 Assuming Normal Distribution 470 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 471 95% Student's -t UCL 5023 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 5134 472 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 5051 473 474 Gamma GOF Test 475 A -D Test Statistic 0.397 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 476 5% A -D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 477 K -S Test Statistic 0.139 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 478 5% K -S Critical Value 0.217 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 479 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 480 481 Gamma Statistics 482 k hat (MLE) 2.883 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.384 483 Theta hat (MLE) 1359 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1644 484 nu hat (MLE) 92.25 nu star (bias corrected) 76.29 485 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3919 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2538 486 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 57.17 487 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 55.29 488 489 Assuming Gamma Distribution 490 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 5229 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5407 491 492 Lognormal GOF Test 493 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.956 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 494 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 495 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.126 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 496 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 497 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 498 499 Lognormal Statistics 500 Minimum of Logged Data 7.17 Mean of logged Data 8.09 501 Maximum of Logged Data 9.17 SD of logged Data 0.623 502 503 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 504 95% H -UCL 5630 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5815 505 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6681 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7881 506 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10240 507 508 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 509 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 510 511 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 512 95% CLT UCL 4955 95% Jackknife UCL 5023 513 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 4945 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 5363 514 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5089 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4975 515 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5038 516 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5808 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6664 517 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7852 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10185 518 519 Suggested UCL to Use 520 95% Student's -t UCL 5023 A B C D E F G H I J K L 521 522 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 523 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 524 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 525 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 526 527 Antimony 528 529 General Statistics 530 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 2 531 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 15 532 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 533 534 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 535 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 536 537 The data set for variable Antimony was not processed! 538 539 540 Arsenic 541 542 General Statistics 543 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 10 544 Number of Detects 13 Number of Non -Detects 3 545 Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 546 Minimum Detect 1.2 Minimum Non -Detect 1 547 Maximum Detect 3.4 Maximum Non -Detect 1 548 Variance Detects 0.491 Percent Non -Detects 18.75% 549 Mean Detects 1.946 SD Detects 0.701 550 Median Detects 1.9 CV Detects 0.36 551 Skewness Detects 0.922 Kurtosis Detects 0.273 552 Mean of Logged Detects 0.61 SD of Logged Detects 0.345 553 554 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 555 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.891 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 556 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 557 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.162 Lilliefors GOF Test 558 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 559 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 560 561 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 562 Mean 1.769 Standard Error of Mean 0.185 563 SD 0.71 95% KM (BCA) UCL 2.088 564 95% KM (t) UCL 2.093 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 2.056 565 95% KM (z) UCL 2.073 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 2.166 566 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.323 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.574 567 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.923 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.608 568 569 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 570 A -D Test Statistic 0.406 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 571 5% A -D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 572 K -S Test Statistic 0.131 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF A B C D I E I F G I H I I I J I K I L 573 5% K -S Critical Value 0.237 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 574 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 575 5761 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 577 k hat (MLE) 9.075 k star (bias corrected MLE) 7.032 578 Theta hat (MLE) 0.214 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.277 579 nu hat (MLE) 235.9 nu star (bias corrected) 182.8 580 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.946 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.734 581 582 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 583 k hat (KM) 6.199 nu hat (KM) 198.4 584 Approximate Chi Square Value (198.38, a) 166.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (198.38, R) 163.5 585 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 2.104 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 2.146 586 587 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 5881 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 589 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 590 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 591 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 592 Minimum 0.355 Mean 1.686 593 Maximum 3.4 Median 1.7 5941 SD 0.843 CV 0.5 595 k hat (MLE) 3.624 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.986 596 Theta hat (MLE) 0.465 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.565 597 nu hat (MLE) 116 nu star (bias corrected) 95.55 598 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.686 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.976 599 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 6001 Approximate Chi Square Value (95.55, a) 74.01 Adjusted Chi Square Value (95.55, R) 71.85 601 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 2.177 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 2.243 602 603 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 604 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.927 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 605 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 6061 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors GOF Test 607 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 608 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 609 610 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 611 Mean in Original Scale 1.734 Mean in Log Scale 0.456 6121 SD in Original Scale 0.776 SD in Log Scale 0.456 613 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 2.074 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.053 614 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.088 95% Bootstrap t UCL 2.165 615 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 2.216 616 617 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 6181 KM Mean (logged) 0.495 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 2.137 619 KM SD (logged) 0.382 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.938 620 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0994 621 622 DL/2 Statistics 623 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 16241 Mean in Original Scale 1.675 Mean in Log Scale 0.365 A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 625 SD in Original Scale 0.856 SD in Log Scale 0.609 626 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 2.05 95% H -Stat UCL 2.441 627 DU2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 628 629 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 630 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 631 632 Suggested UCL to Use 633 95% KM (t) UCL 2.093 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 2.056 634 635 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 636 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 637 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 638 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 639 640 641 1 Barium 642 643 General Statistics 644 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14 645 Number of Missing Observations 0 646 Minimum 6.2 Mean 24.6 647 Maximum 57 Median 19 648 SD 16.53 Std. Error of Mean 4.134 649 Coefficient of Variation 0.672 Skewness 0.853 650 651 Normal GOF Test 652 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.886 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 653 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 654 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.235 Lilliefors GOF Test 655 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 656 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 657 658 Assuming Normal Distribution 659 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 660 95% Student's -t UCL 31.85 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 32.34 661 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 31.99 662 663 Gamma GOF Test 664 A -D Test Statistic 0.334 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 665 5% A -D Critical Value 0.748 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 666 K -S Test Statistic 0.161 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 667 5% K -S Critical Value 0.217 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 668 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 669 670 Gamma Statistics 671 k hat (MILE) 2.415 k star (bias corrected MILE) 2.004 672 Theta hat (MILE) 10.18 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 12.27 673 nu hat (MILE) 77.29 nu star (bias corrected) 64.13 674 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 24.6 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 17.38 675 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 46.71 16761 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 45.02 A B C D E F G H I J K L 677 678 Assuming Gamma Distribution 679 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50) 33.78 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 35.05 680 681 1 Lognormal GOF Test 682 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.955 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 683 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 684 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.117 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 685 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 686 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 687 688 Lognormal Statistics 689 Minimum of Logged Data 1.825 Mean of logged Data 2.982 690 Maximum of Logged Data 4.043 SD of logged Data 0.703 691 692 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 693 95% H -UCL 38.24 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 38.62 694 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 44.89 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 53.59 695 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 70.67 696 697 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 6981 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 699 700 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 701 95% CLT UCL 31.4 95% Jackknife UCL 31.85 702 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 31.18 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 33.16 703 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 32.01 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 31.49 704 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 31.88 705 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 37 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 42.62 706 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 50.41 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 65.73 707 708 Suggested UCL to Use 709 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 35.05 710 711 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 712 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 713 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 714 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 715 716 Beryllium 717 718 General Statistics 719 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 6 720 Number of Detects 5 Number of Non -Detects 11 721 Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 722 Minimum Detect 0.25 Minimum Non -Detect 0.2 723 Maximum Detect 0.45 Maximum Non -Detect 0.2 724 Variance Detects 0.00577 Percent Non -Detects 68.75% 725 Mean Detects 0.358 SD Detects 0.076 726 Median Detects 0.38 CV Detects 0.212 727 Skewness Detects -0.468 Kurtosis Detects -0.0758 17281 Mean of Logged Detects -1.047 SD of Logged Detects 0.225 A B C D E F G H I J K L 729 730 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 731 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.972 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 732 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 733 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.214 Lilliefors GOF Test 734 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 735 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 736 737 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 738 Mean 0.249 Standard Error of Mean 0.0231 739 SD 0.0825 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.285 740 95% KM (t) UCL 0.29 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.284 741 95% KM (z) UCL 0.287 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.274 742 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.319 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.35 743 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.393 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.479 744 745 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 746 A -D Test Statistic 0.262 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 747 5% A -D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 748 K -S Test Statistic 0.245 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 749 5% K -S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 750 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 751 752 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 753 k hat (MLE) 25.85 k star (bias corrected MLE) 10.48 754 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0138 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0342 755 nu hat (MLE) 258.5 nu star (bias corrected) 104.8 756 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.358 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.111 757 758 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 759 k hat (KM) 9.137 nu hat (KM) 292.4 760 Approximate Chi Square Value (292.40, a) 253.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (292.40, R) 249.7 761 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.287 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.292 762 763 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 764 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 765 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 766 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 767 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 768 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.186 769 Maximum 0.45 Median 0.166 770 SD 0.141 CV 0.755 771 k hat (MLE) 1.222 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.035 772 Theta hat (MLE) 0.152 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.18 773 nu hat (MLE) 39.11 nu star (bias corrected) 33.11 774 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.186 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.183 775 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 776 Approximate Chi Square Value (33.11, a) 20.95 Adjusted Chi Square Value (33.11, R) 19.85 777 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.294 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.311 778 779 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 780 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test A B C I D I E F G I H I I I J I K I L 781 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 782 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.237 Lilliefors GOF Test 783 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 7841 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 785 786 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 787 Mean in Original Scale 0.222 Mean in Log Scale -1.62 788 SD in Original Scale 0.11 SD in Log Scale 0.493 789 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.27 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.267 790 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.273 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.275 791 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.29 792 793 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 794 KM Mean (logged) -1.434 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.285 795 KM SD (logged) 0.284 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.859 796 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0794 797 798 DL/2 Statistics 799 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 800 Mean in Original Scale 0.181 Mean in Log Scale -1.91 801 SD in Original Scale 0.13 SD in Log Scale 0.612 802 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.237 95% H -Stat UCL 0.252 803 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 804 805 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 806 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 807 808 Suggested UCL to Use 809 95% KM (t) UCL 0.29 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.284 810 811 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 812 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 813 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 8141 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 815 816 Boron 817 818 General Statistics 819 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 3 820 Number of Detects 3 Number of Non -Detects 13 821 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 822 Minimum Detect 6.4 Minimum Non -Detect 5 823 Maximum Detect 7.3 Maximum Non -Detect 5 824 Variance Detects 0.27 Percent Non -Detects 81.25% 825 Mean Detects 7 SD Detects 0.52 826 Median Detects 7.3 CV Detects 0.0742 827 Skewness Detects -1.732 Kurtosis Detects N/A 828 Mean of Logged Detects 1.944 SD of Logged Detects 0.076 829 830 Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values. 831 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 832 A B C D E F G H I J K L 833 834 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 835 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 836 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 8371 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 838 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 839 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 840 841 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 842 Mean 5.375 Standard Error of Mean 0.246 843 SD 0.802 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 844 95% KM (t) UCL 5.805 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 845 95% KM (z) UCL 5.779 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 846 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.112 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.445 847 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.908 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.818 848 849 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 850 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 851 852 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 853 k hat (MLE) 264.1 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 854 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0265 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 855 nu hat (MLE) 1584 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 856 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 857 858 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 859 k hat (KM) 44.92 nu hat (KM) 1438 860 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 861 Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, a) 1350 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, (3) 1341 862 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 5.721 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 5.762 863 864 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 865 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 866 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 867 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 868 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 869 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 870 871 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 872 Mean in Original Scale 5.404 Mean in Log Scale 1.671 873 SD in Original Scale 1.017 SD in Log Scale 0.186 874 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 5.85 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.822 875 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.857 95% Bootstrap t UCL 5.909 876 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 5.894 877 878 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 879 KM Mean (logged) 1.672 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 5.707 880 KM SD (logged) 0.133 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.76 881 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0408 882 883 DL/2 Statistics 884 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 885 Mean in Original Scale 3.344 Mean in Log Scale 1.109 886 SD in Original Scale 1.824 SD in Log Scale 0.415 887 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4.143 95% H -Stat UCL 4.08 8881 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 889 890 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 891 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 892 893 Suggested UCL to Use 894 95% KM (t) UCL 5.805 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 895 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 896 897 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 898 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 899 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 9001 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 901 902 Boron (Available) 903 904 General Statistics 905 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 906 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 1 907 Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 908 Minimum Detect 0.082 Minimum Non -Detect 0.05 909 Maximum Detect 0.33 Maximum Non -Detect 0.05 910 Variance Detects 0.00653 Percent Non -Detects 10% 911 Mean Detects 0.224 SD Detects 0.0808 912 Median Detects 0.24 CV Detects 0.361 913 Skewness Detects -0.388 Kurtosis Detects -0.655 914 Mean of Logged Detects -1.572 SD of Logged Detects 0.437 915 916 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 917 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.952 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 918 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 919 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.162 Lilliefors GOF Test 920 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 921 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 922 923 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 924 Mean 0.206 Standard Error of Mean 0.0299 925 SD 0.0891 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.252 926 95% KM (t) UCL 0.261 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.251 927 95% KM (z) UCL 0.255 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.256 928 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.296 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.336 929 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.393 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.503 930 931 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 932 A -D Test Statistic 0.368 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 933 5% A -D Critical Value 0.722 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 934 K -S Test Statistic 0.183 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 935 5% K -S Critical Value 0.28 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 19361 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 937 938 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 939 k hat (MLE) 6.948 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.706 940 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0322 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0475 941 1 nu hat (MLE) 125.1 nu star (bias corrected) 84.71 942 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.224 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.103 943 944 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 945 k hat (KM) 5.359 nu hat (KM) 107.2 946 Approximate Chi Square Value (107.18, a) 84.29 Adjusted Chi Square Value (107.18, R) 80.77 947 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.262 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.274 948 949 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 950 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 951 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 952 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 953 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 954 Minimum 0.0684 Mean 0.208 955 Maximum 0.33 Median 0.21 956 SD 0.0906 CV 0.436 957 k hat (MLE) 4.594 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.283 958 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0453 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0634 959 nu hat (MLE) 91.88 nu star (bias corrected) 65.65 960 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.208 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.115 961 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 962 Approximate Chi Square Value (65.65, a) 48.01 Adjusted Chi Square Value (65.65, R) 45.39 963 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.285 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.301 964 965 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 966 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.888 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 967 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 968 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.185 Lilliefors GOF Test 969 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 9701 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 971 972 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 973 Mean in Original Scale 0.209 Mean in Log Scale -1.672 974 SD in Original Scale 0.0893 SD in Log Scale 0.52 975 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.261 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.253 976 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.252 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.256 977 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.318 978 979 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 980 KM Mean (logged) -1.714 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.334 981 KM SD (logged) 0.579 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.335 9821 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.194 983 984 DU2 Statistics 985 DU2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 986 Mean in Original Scale 0.204 Mean in Log Scale -1.783 987 SD in Original Scale 0.0987 SD in Log Scale 0.786 988 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.261 95% H -Stat UCL 0.462 A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 989 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 990 991 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 9921 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 993 994 Suggested UCL to Use 995 95% KM (t) UCL 0.261 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.251 996 997 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 998 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 999 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1000 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1001 1002 Cadmium 1003 1004 General Statistics 1005 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 5 1006 Number of Detects 5 Number of Non -Detects 11 1007 Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1008 Minimum Detect 0.1 Minimum Non -Detect 0.1 1009 Maximum Detect 0.17 Maximum Non -Detect 0.1 1010 Variance Detects 7.5000E-4 Percent Non -Detects 68.75% 1011 Mean Detects 0.14 SD Detects 0.0274 1012 Median Detects 0.14 CV Detects 0.196 1013 Skewness Detects -0.609 Kurtosis Detects -0.133 1014 Mean of Logged Detects -1.983 SD of Logged Detects 0.208 1015 1016 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1017 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.963 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1018 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1019 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.167 Lilliefors GOF Test 1020 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1021 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1022 1023 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1024 Mean 0.113 Standard Error of Mean 0.00644 1025 SD 0.023 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.123 1026 95% KM (t) UCL 0.124 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.123 1027 95% KM (z) UCL 0.123 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.121 1028 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.132 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.141 1029 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.153 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.177 1030 1031 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1032 A -D Test Statistic 0.255 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1033 5% A -D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1034 K -S Test Statistic 0.192 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1035 5% K -S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1036 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1037 1038 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1039 k hat (MLE) 30.33 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.26 1040 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00462 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0114 A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 1041 nu hat (MLE) 303.3 nu star (bias corrected) 122.6 1042 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.14 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.04 1043 10441 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1045 k hat (KM) 23.82 nu hat (KM) 762.4 1046 Approximate Chi Square Value (762.35, a) 699.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (762.35, R) 692.4 1047 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.123 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.124 1048 1049 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 10501 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1051 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1052 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1053 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1054 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0774 1055 Maximum 0.17 Median 0.0709 10561 SD 0.0516 CV 0.666 1057 k hat (MLE) 1.839 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.536 1058 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0421 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0504 1059 nu hat (MLE) 58.84 nu star (bias corrected) 49.14 1060 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0774 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0625 1061 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 10621 Approximate Chi Square Value (49.14, a) 34.05 Adjusted Chi Square Value (49.14, R) 32.62 1063 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.112 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.117 1064 1065 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1066 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.938 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1067 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1068 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.191 Lilliefors GOF Test 1069 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1070 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1071 1072 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1073 Mean in Original Scale 0.0895 Mean in Log Scale -2.51 1074 SD in Original Scale 0.0409 SD in Log Scale 0.453 1075 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.107 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.107 1076 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.106 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.112 1077 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.114 1078 1079 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1080 KM Mean (logged) -2.203 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.122 1081 KM SD (logged) 0.181 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.788 1082 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0506 1083 1084 DL/2 Statistics 1085 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1086 Mean in Original Scale 0.0781 Mean in Log Scale -2.679 1087 SD in Original Scale 0.0453 SD in Log Scale 0.497 1088 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.098 95% H -Stat UCL 0.101 1089 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1090 1091 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 110921 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 1093 1094 Suggested UCL to Use 1095 95% KM (t) UCL 0.124 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.123 1096 1097 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1098 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1099 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1100 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1101 1102 1103 Calcium 1104 1105 General Statistics 1106 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 13 1107 Number of Missing Observations 0 1108 Minimum 49000 Mean 59375 1109 Maximum 69000 Median 58500 1110 SD 6334 Std. Error of Mean 1583 1111 Coefficient of Variation 0.107 Skewness -0.0233 1112 1113 Normal GOF Test 1114 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.941 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1115 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1116 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.128 Lilliefors GOF Test 1117 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1118 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1119 1120 Assuming Normal Distribution 1121 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1122 95% Student's -t UCL 62151 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 61970 1123 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 62149 1124 1125 Gamma GOF Test 1126 A -D Test Statistic 0.4 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1127 5% A -D Critical Value 0.736 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1128 K -S Test Statistic 0.138 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1129 5% K -S Critical Value 0.214 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1130 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1131 1132 Gamma Statistics 1133 k hat (MLE) 92.81 k star (bias corrected MLE) 75.45 1134 Theta hat (MLE) 639.8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 787 1135 nu hat (MLE) 2970 nu star (bias corrected) 2414 1136 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 59375 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6836 1137 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 2301 1138 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2289 1139 1140 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1141 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 62294 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 62637 1142 1143 Lognormal GOF Test 111441 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.94 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 1145 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1146 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.131 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1147 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 11481 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1149 1150 Lognormal Statistics 1151 Minimum of Logged Data 10.8 Mean of logged Data 10.99 1152 Maximum of Logged Data 11.14 SD of logged Data 0.108 1153 1154 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1155 95% H -UCL 62354 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 64179 1156 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 66354 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 69373 1157 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 75303 1158 1159 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1160 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1161 1162 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1163 95% CLT UCL 61980 95% Jackknife UCL 62151 1164 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 61887 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 62187 1165 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 61993 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 61875 1166 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 61875 1167 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 64125 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 66277 1168 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 69264 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 75130 1169 1170 Suggested UCL to Use 1171 95% Student's -t UCL 62151 1172 1173 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1174 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1175 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1176 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1177 1178 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 1179 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 1180 1181 1182 Chromium (Total) 1183 1184 General Statistics 1185 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14 1186 Number of Missing Observations 0 1187 Minimum 2.4 Mean 7.081 1188 Maximum 15 Median 6.2 1189 SD 3.674 Std. Error of Mean 0.918 1190 Coefficient of Variation 0.519 Skewness 0.79 1191 1192 Normal GOF Test 1193 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.923 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1194 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1195 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.166 Lilliefors GOF Test 1196 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1197 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1198 1199 Assuming Normal Distribution 1200 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1201 95% Student's -t UCL 8.691 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 8.786 1202 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 8.722 1203 1204 Gamma GOF Test 1205 A -D Test Statistic 0.232 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1206 5% A -D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1207 K -S Test Statistic 0.117 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1208 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1209 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1210 1211 Gamma Statistics 1212 k hat (MLE) 4.029 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.315 1213 Theta hat (MLE) 1.758 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.136 1214 nu hat (MLE) 128.9 nu star (bias corrected) 106.1 1215 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.081 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.889 1216 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 83.32 1217 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 81.02 1218 1219 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1220 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 9.016 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 9.272 1221 1222 Lognormal GOF Test 1223 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.969 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1224 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1225 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.106 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1226 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1227 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1228 1229 Lognormal Statistics 1230 Minimum of Logged Data 0.875 Mean of logged Data 1.828 1231 Maximum of Logged Data 2.708 SD of logged Data 0.536 1232 1233 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1234 95% H -UCL 9.589 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.07 1235 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.41 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.27 1236 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.93 1237 1238 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1239 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1240 1241 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1242 95% CLT UCL 8.592 95% Jackknife UCL 8.691 1243 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 8.578 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 9.006 1244 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 8.905 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 8.625 1245 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 8.675 1246 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.837 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.08 1247 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.82 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 16.22 1248 A B C D E F I G H I J K L 1249 Suggested UCL to Use 1250 95% Student's -t UCL 8.691 1251 12521 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1253 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1254 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1255 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1256 1257 1258 Cobalt 1259 1260 General Statistics 1261 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15 1262 Number of Missing Observations 0 1263 Minimum 1.4 Mean 3.194 1264 Maximum 6.8 Median 2.65 1265 SD 1.664 Std. Error of Mean 0.416 1266 Coefficient of Variation 0.521 Skewness 0.93 1267 1268 Normal GOF Test 1269 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.885 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1270 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1271 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.179 Lilliefors GOF Test 1272 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1273 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1274 1275 Assuming Normal Distribution 1276 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1277 95% Student's -t UCL 3.923 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 3.981 1278 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 3.939 1279 1280 Gamma GOF Test 1281 A -D Test Statistic 0.439 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1282 5% A -D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1283 K -S Test Statistic 0.133 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1284 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1285 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1286 1287 Gamma Statistics 1288 k hat (MLE) 4.312 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.545 1289 Theta hat (MLE) 0.741 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.901 1290 nu hat (MLE) 138 nu star (bias corrected) 113.4 1291 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.194 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 1.696 1292 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 89.86 1293 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 87.47 1294 1295 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1296 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 4.032 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 4.142 1297 1298 Lognormal GOF Test 1299 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.943 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1300 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E F G H I I I J I K L 1301 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.129 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1302 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1303 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1304 1305 Lognormal Statistics 1306 Minimum of Logged Data 0.336 Mean of logged Data 1.041 1307 Maximum of Logged Data 1.917 SD of logged Data 0.503 1308 1309 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1310 95% H -UCL 4.195 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4.425 1311 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4.987 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.766 1312 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.297 1313 1314 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1315 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1316 1317 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1318 95% CLT UCL 3.878 95% Jackknife UCL 3.923 1319 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3.842 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 4.056 1320 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 3.967 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3.881 1321 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3.981 1322 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4.442 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.007 1323 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.792 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.333 1324 1325 Suggested UCL to Use 1326 95% Student's -t UCL 3.923 1327 1328 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1329 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1330 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1331 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1332 1333 1334 Copper 1335 1336 General Statistics 1337 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14 1338 Number of Missing Observations 0 1339 Minimum 2.2 Mean 7.838 1340 Maximum 18 Median 6.1 1341 SD 4.857 Std. Error of Mean 1.214 1342 Coefficient of Variation 0.62 Skewness 0.798 1343 1344 Normal GOF Test 1345 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.904 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1346 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1347 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.202 Lilliefors GOF Test 1348 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1349 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1350 1351 Assuming Normal Distribution 1352 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) A B C D I E F G H I I I J I K L 1353 95% Student's -t UCL 9.966 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 10.09 1354 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 10.01 1355 13561 Gamma GOF Test 1357 A -D Test Statistic 0.332 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1358 5% A -D Critical Value 0.745 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1359 K -S Test Statistic 0.142 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1360 5% K -S Critical Value 0.217 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1361 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1362 1363 Gamma Statistics 1364 k hat (MLE) 2.823 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.335 1365 Theta hat (MLE) 2.777 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.356 1366 nu hat (MLE) 90.33 nu star (bias corrected) 74.72 1367 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 7.838 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.129 1368 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 55.82 1369 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 53.96 1370 1371 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1372 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 10.49 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 10.85 1373 1374 Lognormal GOF Test 1375 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.956 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1376 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1377 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.114 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1378 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1379 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1380 1381 Lognormal Statistics 1382 Minimum of Logged Data 0.788 Mean of logged Data 1.871 1383 Maximum of Logged Data 2.89 SD of logged Data 0.646 1384 1385 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1386 95% H -UCL 11.58 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.89 1387 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.71 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16.23 1388 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 21.18 1389 1390 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1391 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1392 1393 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1394 95% CLT UCL 9.835 95% Jackknife UCL 9.966 1395 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 9.801 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 10.53 1396 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.04 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 9.794 1397 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10.06 1398 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.48 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.13 1399 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.42 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19.92 1400 1401 Suggested UCL to Use 1402 95% Student's -t UCL 9.966 1403 1404 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. A B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K L 1405 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1406 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1407 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1408 1409 1410 Iron 1411 1412 General Statistics 1413 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15 14141 Number of Missing Observations 0 1415 Minimum 3500 Mean 8900 1416 Maximum 18000 Median 8000 1417 SD 4434 Std. Error of Mean 1109 1418 Coefficient of Variation 0.498 Skewness 0.739 1419 1420 Normal GOF Test 1421 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.913 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1422 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1423 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors GOF Test 1424 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1425 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1426 1427 Assuming Normal Distribution 1428 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1429 95% Student's -t UCL 10843 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 10942 1430 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 10878 1431 1432 Gamma GOF Test 1433 A -D Test Statistic 0.305 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1434 5% A -D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1435 K -S Test Statistic 0.131 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1436 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1437 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1438 1439 Gamma Statistics 1440 k hat (MLE) 4.414 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.628 14411 Theta hat (MLE) 2016 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2453 14421 nu hat (MLE) 141.3 nu star (bias corrected) 116.1 1443 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 8900 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4672 1444 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 92.23 1445 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 89.8 1446 1447 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1448 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 11204 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 11506 1449 1450 Lognormal GOF Test 1451 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.956 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1452 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1453 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.12 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1454 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1455 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1456 A B C D E F I G H I J K L 1457 Lognormal Statistics 1458 Minimum of Logged Data 8.161 Mean of logged Data 8.976 1459 Maximum of Logged Data 9.798 SD of logged Data 0.507 1460 1461 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1462 95% H -UCL 11778 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12419 1463 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14004 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 16204 1464 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 20527 1465 1466 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1467 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1468 1469 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1470 95% CLT UCL 10723 95% Jackknife UCL 10843 1471 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 10663 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 11116 1472 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10905 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 10781 1473 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 10675 1474 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12226 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13732 1475 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15823 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19930 1476 1477 Suggested UCL to Use 1478 95% Student's -t UCL 10843 1479 1480 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1481 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1482 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1483 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1484 1485 1486 Lead 1487 1488 General Statistics 1489 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15 1490 Number of Missing Observations 0 1491 Minimum 2.3 Mean 5.331 1492 Maximum 11 Median 4.3 1493 SD 2.682 Std. Error of Mean 0.67 1494 Coefficient of Variation 0.503 Skewness 0.774 1495 1496 Normal GOF Test 1497 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.904 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1498 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1499 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.198 Lilliefors GOF Test 1500 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1501 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1502 1503 Assuming Normal Distribution 1504 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1505 95% Student's -t UCL 6.507 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 6.573 1506 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 6.528 1507 1508 Gamma GOF Test A B C D E F G H I I I J I K L 1509 A -D Test Statistic 0.406 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1510 5% A -D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1511 K -S Test Statistic 0.154 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1512 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1513 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1514 1515 Gamma Statistics 1516 k hat (MLE) 4.47 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.674 1517 Theta hat (MLE) 1.193 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.451 1518 nu hat (MLE) 143 nu star (bias corrected) 117.6 1519 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 5.331 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.782 1520 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 93.52 1521 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 91.08 1522 1523 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1524 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 6.701 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.881 1525 1526 Lognormal GOF Test 1527 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.946 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1528 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1529 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.123 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1530 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1531 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1532 1533 Lognormal Statistics 1534 Minimum of Logged Data 0.833 Mean of logged Data 1.558 1535 Maximum of Logged Data 2.398 SD of logged Data 0.497 1536 1537 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1538 95% H -UCL 6.984 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.372 1539 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.299 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.586 1540 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.11 1541 1542 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1543 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1544 1545 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1546 95% CLT UCL 6.434 95% Jackknife UCL 6.507 1547 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 6.405 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 6.708 1548 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 6.567 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6.475 1549 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 6.45 1550 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.343 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.254 1551 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.518 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12 1552 1553 Suggested UCL to Use 1554 95% Student's -t UCL 6.507 1555 1556 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1557 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1558 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1559 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1560 A B C D E F G H I J K L 1561 1562 Lithium 1563 15641 General Statistics 1565 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 1566 Number of Missing Observations 0 1567 Minimum 2.9 Mean 6.6 1568 Maximum 14 Median 4.9 1569 SD 4.022 Std. Error of Mean 1.272 1570 Coefficient of Variation 0.609 Skewness 0.945 1571 1572 Normal GOF Test 1573 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.851 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1574 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1575 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.245 Lilliefors GOF Test 1576 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1577 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1578 1579 Assuming Normal Distribution 1580 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1581 95% Student's -t UCL 8.932 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 9.098 1582 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 8.995 1583 1584 Gamma GOF Test 1585 A -D Test Statistic 0.491 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1586 5% A -D Critical Value 0.731 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1587 K -S Test Statistic 0.204 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1588 5% K -S Critical Value 0.268 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1589 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1590 1591 Gamma Statistics 1592 k hat (MLE) 3.341 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.406 1593 Theta hat (MLE) 1.975 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.744 1594 nu hat (MLE) 66.83 nu star (bias corrected) 48.11 1595 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 6.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.255 1596 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 33.19 1597 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 31.05 1598 1599 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1600 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 9.567 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 10.23 1601 1602 Lognormal GOF Test 1603 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.909 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1604 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1605 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.169 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1606 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1607 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1608 1609 Lognormal Statistics 1610 Minimum of Logged Data 1.065 Mean of logged Data 1.73 1611 Maximum of Logged Data 2.639 SD of logged Data 0.581 1612 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1613 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1614 95% H -UCL 10.51 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.25 1615 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.92 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.25 1616 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.81 1617 1618 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1619 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1620 1621 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1622 95% CLT UCL 8.692 95% Jackknife UCL 8.932 1623 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 8.577 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 9.925 1624 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 8.748 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 8.74 1625 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 9.02 1626 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.42 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.14 1627 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14.54 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19.26 1628 1629 Suggested UCL to Use 1630 95% Student's -t UCL 8.932 1631 1632 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1633 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1634 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1635 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1636 1637 1638 Magnesium 1639 1640 General Statistics 1641 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 11 1642 Number of Missing Observations 0 1643 Minimum 5900 Mean 11138 1644 Maximum 15000 Median 11500 1645 SD 2681 Std. Error of Mean 670.1 1646 Coefficient of Variation 0.241 Skewness -0.567 1647 1648 Normal GOF Test 1649 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.944 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1650 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1651 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.126 Lilliefors GOF Test 1652 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1653 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1654 1655 Assuming Normal Distribution 1656 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1657 95% Student's -t UCL 12312 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 12138 1658 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 12296 1659 1660 Gamma GOF Test 1661 A -D Test Statistic 0.509 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1662 5% A -D Critical Value 0.738 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1663 K -S Test Statistic 0.15 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1664 5% K -S Critical Value 0.215 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 1665 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1666 1667 Gamma Statistics 16681 k hat (MLE) 15.87 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.94 1669 Theta hat (MLE) 701.7 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 860.9 1670 nu hat (MLE) 507.9 nu star (bias corrected) 414 1671 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 11138 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3096 1672 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 367.8 1673 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 362.9 1674 1675 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1676 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 12535 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12706 1677 1678 Lognormal GOF Test 1679 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.891 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1680 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1681 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.153 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1682 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1683 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1684 1685 Lognormal Statistics 1686 Minimum of Logged Data 8.683 Mean of logged Data 9.286 1687 Maximum of Logged Data 9.616 SD of logged Data 0.272 1688 1689 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1690 95% H -UCL 12752 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13474 1691 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14518 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15967 1692 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18813 1693 1694 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1695 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1696 1697 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1698 95% CLT UCL 12240 95% Jackknife UCL 12312 1699 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 12215 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 12235 1700 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 12085 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 12175 1701 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 12144 1702 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13148 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 14059 1703 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15322 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17805 1704 1705 Suggested UCL to Use 1706 95% Student's -t UCL 12312 1707 1708 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1709 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1710 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1711 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1712 1713 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 1714 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 1715 1716 A I B C D E F G H I J K L 1717 Manganese 1718 1719 General Statistics 17201 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 13 1721 Number of Missing Observations 0 1722 Minimum 140 Mean 320.6 1723 Maximum 630 Median 270 1724 SD 154 Std. Error of Mean 38.51 1725 Coefficient of Variation 0.48 Skewness 0.722 1726 1727 Normal GOF Test 1728 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.915 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1729 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1730 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.191 Lilliefors GOF Test 1731 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1732 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1733 1734 Assuming Normal Distribution 1735 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1736 95% Student's -t UCL 388.1 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 391.4 1737 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 389.3 1738 1739 Gamma GOF Test 1740 A -D Test Statistic 0.306 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1741 5% A -D Critical Value 0.741 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1742 K -S Test Statistic 0.146 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1743 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1744 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1745 1746 Gamma Statistics 1747 k hat (MLE) 4.805 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.946 1748 Theta hat (MLE) 66.72 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 81.26 1749 nu hat (MLE) 153.8 nu star (bias corrected) 126.3 1750 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 320.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 161.4 1751 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 101.3 1752 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 98.77 1753 1754 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1755 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 399.6 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 409.9 1756 1757 Lognormal GOF Test 1758 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.953 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1759 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1760 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.116 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1761 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1762 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1763 1764 Lognormal Statistics 1765 Minimum of Logged Data 4.942 Mean of logged Data 5.663 1766 Maximum of Logged Data 6.446 SD of logged Data 0.482 1767 117681 Assuming Lognormal Distribution A B C D E F G H I J K L 1769 95% H -UCL 416.3 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 440.1 1770 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 494.1 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 569.1 1771 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 716.5 1772 1773 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1774 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1775 1776 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1777 95% CLT UCL 384 95% Jackknife UCL 388.1 1778 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 382.8 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 398.3 1779 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 386.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 383.1 1780 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 388.1 1781 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 436.1 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 488.5 1782 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 561.1 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 703.8 1783 1784 Suggested UCL to Use 1785 95% Student's -t UCL 388.1 1786 1787 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1788 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1789 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1790 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1791 1792 1793 Nickel 1794 1795 General Statistics 1796 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14 1797 Number of Missing Observations 0 1798 Minimum 2.6 Mean 6.625 1799 Maximum 15 Median 5.15 1800 SD 3.728 Std. Error of Mean 0.932 1801 Coefficient of Variation 0.563 Skewness 1.064 1802 1803 Normal GOF Test 1804 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.87 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1805 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1806 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.211 Lilliefors GOF Test 1807 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1808 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1809 1810 Assuming Normal Distribution 1811 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1812 95% Student's -t UCL 8.259 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 8.423 1813 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 8.3 1814 1815 Gamma GOF Test 1816 A -D Test Statistic 0.48 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1817 5% A -D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1818 K -S Test Statistic 0.173 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1819 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 118201 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 1821 1822 Gamma Statistics 1823 k hat (MLE) 3.831 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.154 18241 Theta hat (MLE) 1.729 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.1 1825 nu hat (MLE) 122.6 nu star (bias corrected) 100.9 1826 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 6.625 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.73 1827 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 78.76 1828 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 76.53 1829 1830 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1831 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 8.491 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 8.738 1832 1833 Lognormal GOF Test 1834 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.95 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1835 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1836 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.142 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1837 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1838 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1839 1840 Lognormal Statistics 1841 Minimum of Logged Data 0.956 Mean of logged Data 1.755 1842 Maximum of Logged Data 2.708 SD of logged Data 0.531 1843 1844 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1845 95% H -UCL 8.856 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.309 1846 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10.54 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.25 1847 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 15.6 1848 1849 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1850 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1851 1852 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1853 95% CLT UCL 8.158 95% Jackknife UCL 8.259 1854 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 8.062 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 8.663 1855 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 8.291 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 8.181 1856 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 8.431 1857 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9.421 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.69 1858 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12.45 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.9 1859 1860 Suggested UCL to Use 1861 95% Student's -t UCL 8.259 1862 1863 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1864 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1865 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1866 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1867 1868 1869 Phosphorus 1870 1871 General Statistics 118721 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15 A B C D E F G H I I J I K L 1873 Number of Missing Observations 0 1874 Minimum 190 Mean 593.8 1875 Maximum 830 Median 650 18761 SD 196.6 Std. Error of Mean 49.15 1877 Coefficient of Variation 0.331 Skewness -0.861 1878 1879 Normal GOF Test 1880 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.904 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1881 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1882 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2 Lilliefors GOF Test 1883 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1884 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1885 1886 Assuming Normal Distribution 1887 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1888 95% Student's -t UCL 679.9 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 663.3 1889 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 678.2 1890 1891 Gamma GOF Test 1892 A -D Test Statistic 0.974 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1893 5% A -D Critical Value 0.74 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1894 K -S Test Statistic 0.249 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1895 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1896 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1897 1898 Gamma Statistics 1899 k hat (MLE) 7.038 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.76 1900 Theta hat (MLE) 84.36 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 103.1 1901 nu hat (MLE) 225.2 nu star (bias corrected) 184.3 1902 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 593.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 247.4 1903 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 153.9 1904 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 150.8 1905 1906 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1907 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 711 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 725.9 1908 1909 Lognormal GOF Test 1910 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.814 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1911 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1912 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.264 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1913 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1914 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1915 1916 Lognormal Statistics 1917 Minimum of Logged Data 5.247 Mean of logged Data 6.314 1918 Maximum of Logged Data 6.721 SD of logged Data 0.433 1919 1920 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1921 95% H -UCL 757.1 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 803.1 1922 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 894 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1020 1923 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1268 1924 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1925 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1926 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1927 19281 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1929 95% CLT UCL 674.6 95% Jackknife UCL 679.9 1930 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 671.2 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 674.8 1931 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 663.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 670 1932 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 661.9 1933 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 741.2 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 808 1934 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 900.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1083 1935 1936 Suggested UCL to Use 1937 95% Student's -t UCL 679.9 1938 1939 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1940 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1941 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1942 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1943 1944 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 1945 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 1946 1947 Potassium 1948 1949 General Statistics 1950 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15 1951 Number of Detects 15 Number of Non -Detects 1 1952 Number of Distinct Detects 14 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1953 Minimum Detect 210 Minimum Non -Detect 200 1954 Maximum Detect 1400 Maximum Non -Detect 200 1955 Variance Detects 127170 Percent Non -Detects 6.25% 1956 Mean Detects 554.7 SD Detects 356.6 1957 Median Detects 460 CV Detects 0.643 1958 Skewness Detects 1.291 Kurtosis Detects 0.888 1959 Mean of Logged Detects 6.149 SD of Logged Detects 0.589 1960 1961 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1962 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.848 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1963 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1964 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.217 Lilliefors GOF Test 1965 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1966 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1967 1968 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1969 Mean 532.5 Standard Error of Mean 89.13 1970 SD 344.4 95% KM (BCA) UCL 688.8 1971 95% KM (t) UCL 688.8 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 680 1972 95% KM (z) UCL 679.1 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 749 1973 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 799.9 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 921 1974 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1089 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 1419 1975 119761 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only A B C D E F G H I I I J I K L 1977 A -D Test Statistic 0.448 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1978 5% A -D Critical Value 0.744 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1979 K -S Test Statistic 0.148 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1980 5% K -S Critical Value 0.223 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1981 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1982 1983 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1984 k hat (MLE) 3.102 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.526 1985 Theta hat (MLE) 178.8 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 219.6 1986 nu hat (MLE) 93.07 nu star (bias corrected) 75.79 1987 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 554.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 349 1988 1989 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1990 k hat (KM) 2.39 nu hat (KM) 76.48 1991 Approximate Chi Square Value (76.48, a) 57.34 Adjusted Chi Square Value (76.48, R) 55.45 1992 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 710.3 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 734.4 1993 1994 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1995 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1996 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1997 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 19981 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1999 Minimum 0.01 Mean 520 2000 Maximum 1400 Median 440 2001 SD 371.4 CV 0.714 2002 k hat (MLE) 0.768 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.665 2003 Theta hat (MLE) 677.3 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 781.5 20041 nu hat (MLE) 24.57 nu star (bias corrected) 21.29 2005 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 520 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 637.5 2006 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 2007 Approximate Chi Square Value (21.29, a) 11.81 Adjusted Chi Square Value (21.29, (3) 11.01 2008 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 937.6 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1006 2009 20101 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2011 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.949 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2012 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2013 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.125 Lilliefors GOF Test 2014 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2015 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2016 2017 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2018 Mean in Original Scale 526.8 Mean in Log Scale 6.058 2019 SD in Original Scale 362.1 SD in Log Scale 0.676 2020 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 685.5 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 675.5 2021 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 697.5 95% Bootstrap t UCL 739.8 2022 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 795 2023 2024 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2025 KM Mean (logged) 6.095 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 731.2 2026 KM SD (logged) 0.588 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.147 2027 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.152 2028 A B C D E F I G H I J K L 2029 DL/2 Statistics 2030 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2031 Mean in Original Scale 526.3 Mean in Log Scale 6.052 20321 SD in Original Scale 362.8 SD in Log Scale 0.688 2033 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 685.2 95% H -Stat UCL 805 2034 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2035 2036 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2037 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2038 2039 Suggested UCL to Use 2040 95% KM (t) UCL 688.8 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 680 2041 2042 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2043 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2044 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2045 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2046 2047 Sodium 2048 2049 General Statistics 2050 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 10 2051 Number of Detects 13 Number of Non -Detects 3 2052 Number of Distinct Detects 10 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2053 Minimum Detect 70 Minimum Non -Detect 100 2054 Maximum Detect 160 Maximum Non -Detect 100 2055 Variance Detects 909.9 Percent Non -Detects 18.75% 2056 Mean Detects 111.2 SD Detects 30.16 2057 Median Detects 110 CV Detects 0.271 2058 Skewness Detects 0.517 Kurtosis Detects -0.812 2059 Mean of Logged Detects 4.678 SD of Logged Detects 0.269 2060 2061 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2062 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.918 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2063 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2064 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.155 Lilliefors GOF Test 2065 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2066 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2067 2068 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2069 Mean 106 Standard Error of Mean 7.567 2070 SD 28.62 95% KM (BCA) UCL 118.6 2071 95% KM (t) UCL 119.2 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 118.5 2072 95% KM (z) UCL 118.4 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 121.3 2073 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 128.7 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 139 2074 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 153.2 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 181.3 2075 2076 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2077 A -D Test Statistic 0.329 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2078 5% A -D Critical Value 0.734 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2079 K -S Test Statistic 0.135 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2080 5% K -S Critical Value 0.236 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 2081 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2082 2083 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 20841 k hat (MLE) 15.13 k star (bias corrected MLE) 11.69 2085 Theta hat (MLE) 7.352 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 9.516 2086 nu hat (MLE) 393.4 nu star (bias corrected) 303.9 2087 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 111.2 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 32.53 2088 2089 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2090 k hat (KM) 13.72 nu hat (KM) 438.9 2091 Approximate Chi Square Value (438.89, a) 391.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (438.89, R) 386.2 2092 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 118.9 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 120.4 2093 2094 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 2095 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 20961 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2097 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2098 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2099 Minimum 69.59 Mean 105.7 2100 Maximum 160 Median 99.5 2101 SD 29.78 CV 0.282 21021 k hat (MLE) 14.37 k star (bias corrected MLE) 11.71 2103 Theta hat (MLE) 7.359 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 9.024 2104 nu hat (MLE) 459.7 nu star (bias corrected) 374.9 2105 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 105.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 30.89 2106 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 2107 Approximate Chi Square Value (374.88, a) 331 Adjusted Chi Square Value (374.88, (3) 326.3 2108 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 119.7 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 121.5 2109 2110 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2111 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2112 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2113 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.123 Lilliefors GOF Test 2114 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2115 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2116 2117 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2118 Mean in Original Scale 105.9 Mean in Log Scale 4.628 2119 SD in Original Scale 29.55 SD in Log Scale 0.267 2120 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 118.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 118.4 2121 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 119.3 95% Bootstrap t UCL 121.8 2122 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 120.4 2123 2124 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2125 KM Mean (logged) 4.629 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 119.7 21261 KM SD (logged) 0.259 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.84 2127 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0693 2128 2129 DU2 Statistics 2130 DL/2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 2131 Mean in Original Scale 99.75 Mean in Log Scale 4.535 121321 SD in Original Scale 1 36.57 SD in Log Scale 0.391 A B C I D I E IF G H I J I K L 2133 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 115.8 95% H -Stat UCL 122.5 2134 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2135 21361 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2137 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2138 2139 Suggested UCL to Use 2140 95% KM (t) UCL 119.2 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 118.5 2141 2142 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2143 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2144 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2145 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2146 2147 2148 Strontium 2149 2150 General Statistics 2151 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12 2152 Number of Missing Observations 0 2153 Minimum 61 Mean 76.56 2154 Maximum 98 Median 74.5 2155 SD 11.29 Std. Error of Mean 2.822 2156 Coefficient of Variation 0.147 Skewness 0.526 2157 2158 Normal GOF Test 2159 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.936 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2160 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2161 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.145 Lilliefors GOF Test 2162 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2163 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2164 2165 Assuming Normal Distribution 2166 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 2167 95% Student's -t UCL 81.51 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 81.6 2168 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 81.57 2169 2170 Gamma GOF Test 2171 A -D Test Statistic 0.365 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 2172 5% A -D Critical Value 0.735 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2173 K -S Test Statistic 0.127 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 2174 5% K -S Critical Value 0.214 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2175 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2176 2177 Gamma Statistics 2178 k hat (MLE) 50.52 k star (bias corrected MLE) 41.09 2179 Theta hat (MLE) 1.516 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.863 2180 nu hat (MLE) 1617 nu star (bias corrected) 1315 2181 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 76.56 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 11.94 2182 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 1232 2183 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 1222 2184 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 2185 Assuming Gamma Distribution 2186 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 81.73 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 82.35 2187 21881 Lognormal GOF Test 2189 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.951 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 2190 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2191 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.118 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 2192 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2193 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2194 2195 Lognormal Statistics 2196 Minimum of Logged Data 4.111 Mean of logged Data 4.328 2197 Maximum of Logged Data 4.585 SD of logged Data 0.145 2198 2199 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 2200 95% H -UCL 81.83 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 84.88 2201 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 88.66 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 93.9 2202 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 104.2 2203 2204 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2205 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2206 2207 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 2208 95% CLT UCL 81.21 95% Jackknife UCL 81.51 2209 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 81.03 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 82.13 2210 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 81.59 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 81.25 2211 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 81.31 2212 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 85.03 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 88.87 2213 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 94.19 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 104.6 2214 2215 Suggested UCL to Use 2216 95% Student's -t UCL 81.51 2217 2218 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2219 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 2220 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 2221 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2222 2223 Sulfur 2224 2225 General Statistics 2226 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 2227 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 1 2228 Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2229 Minimum Detect 120 Minimum Non -Detect 500 2230 Maximum Detect 690 Maximum Non -Detect 500 2231 Variance Detects 38919 Percent Non -Detects 10% 2232 Mean Detects 347.8 SD Detects 197.3 2233 Median Detects 280 CV Detects 0.567 2234 Skewness Detects 0.619 Kurtosis Detects -0.926 2235 Mean of Logged Detects 5.7 SD of Logged Detects 0.595 2236 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 2237 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2238 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.924 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2239 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 22401 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.19 Lilliefors GOF Test 2241 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2242 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2243 2244 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2245 Mean 339.9 Standard Error of Mean 62.68 2246 SD 182.2 95% KM (BCA) UCL 444.8 2247 95% KM (t) UCL 454.8 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 439 2248 95% KM (z) UCL 443 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 477.1 2249 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 527.9 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 613.1 2250 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 731.3 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 963.5 2251 2252 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2253 A -D Test Statistic 0.258 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2254 5% A -D Critical Value 0.726 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2255 K -S Test Statistic 0.172 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2256 5% K -S Critical Value 0.281 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2257 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2258 2259 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2260 k hat (MLE) 3.458 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.379 2261 Theta hat (MLE) 100.6 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 146.2 2262 nu hat (MLE) 62.24 nu star (bias corrected) 42.83 2263 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 347.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 225.5 2264 2265 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2266 k hat (KM) 3.479 nu hat (KM) 69.57 2267 Approximate Chi Square Value (69.57, a) 51.37 Adjusted Chi Square Value (69.57, R) 48.66 2268 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 460.3 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 485.9 2269 22701 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 2271 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 2272 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2273 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2274 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2275 Minimum 120 Mean 339.1 22761 Maximum 690 Median 270.4 2277 SD 188 CV 0.555 2278 k hat (MLE) 3.735 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.681 2279 Theta hat (MLE) 90.79 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 126.5 2280 nu hat (MLE) 74.69 nu star (bias corrected) 53.62 2281 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 339.1 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 207.1 22821 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0267 2283 Approximate Chi Square Value (53.62, a) 37.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (53.62, (3) 35.5 2284 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 481 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 512.2 2285 2286 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2287 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.961 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2288 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E F G H I I J K L 2289 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.141 Lilliefors GOF Test 2290 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2291 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2292 2293 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2294 Mean in Original Scale 337.5 Mean in Log Scale 5.68 2295 SD in Original Scale 188.8 SD in Log Scale 0.565 2296 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 446.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 434.5 2297 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 447.9 95% Bootstrap t UCL 483.9 2298 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 531.2 2299 2300 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2301 KM Mean (logged) 5.679 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 522.3 2302 KM SD (logged) 0.555 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.299 2303 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.193 2304 2305 DL/2 Statistics 2306 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2307 Mean in Original Scale 338 Mean in Log Scale 5.682 2308 SD in Original Scale 188.6 SD in Log Scale 0.564 2309 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 447.3 95% H -Stat UCL 531.7 2310 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2311 2312 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2313 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2314 2315 Suggested UCL to Use 2316 95% KM (t) UCL 454.8 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 439 2317 2318 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2319 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2320 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2321 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2322 2323 Thallium 2324 2325 General Statistics 2326 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 5 2327 Number of Detects 4 Number of Non -Detects 12 2328 Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2329 Minimum Detect 0.067 Minimum Non -Detect 0.05 2330 Maximum Detect 0.11 Maximum Non -Detect 0.05 2331 Variance Detects 4.1267E-4 Percent Non -Detects 75% 2332 Mean Detects 0.08 SD Detects 0.0203 2333 Median Detects 0.0715 CV Detects 0.254 23341 Skewness Detects 1.825 Kurtosis Detects 3.332 2335 Mean of Logged Detects -2.547 SD of Logged Detects 0.232 2336 2337 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2338 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.762 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2339 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 123401 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.347 Lilliefors GOF Test A B C I D I E I F G I H I I I J I K I L 2341 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2342 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2343 23441 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2345 Mean 0.0575 Standard Error of Mean 0.00453 2346 SD 0.0157 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 2347 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0654 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2348 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0649 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 2349 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0711 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0772 2350 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0858 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.103 2351 2352 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2353 A -D Test Statistic 0.599 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2354 5% A -D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2355 K -S Test Statistic 0.345 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2356 5% K -S Critical Value 0.394 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2358 2359 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2360 k hat (MLE) 23.44 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.026 2361 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00341 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0133 2362 nu hat (MLE) 187.5 nu star (bias corrected) 48.21 2363 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.08 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0326 2364 2365 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2366 k hat (KM) 13.43 nu hat (KM) 429.9 2367 Approximate Chi Square Value (429.86, a) 382.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (429.86, R) 377.7 2368 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0646 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0654 2369 2370 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 2371 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 2372 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2373 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 23741 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2375 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0334 2376 Maximum 0.11 Median 0.0182 2377 SD 0.031 CV 0.928 2378 k hat (MLE) 1.455 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.224 2379 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0229 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0273 23801 nu hat (MLE) 46.56 nu star (bias corrected) 39.16 2381 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0334 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0302 2382 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 2383 Approximate Chi Square Value (39.16, a) 25.83 Adjusted Chi Square Value (39.16, (3) 24.6 2384 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0506 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A 2385 23861 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2387 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.789 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2388 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2389 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.324 Lilliefors GOF Test 2390 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2391 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2392 A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 2393 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2394 Mean in Original Scale 0.0431 Mean in Log Scale -3.298 2395 SD in Original Scale 0.0257 SD in Log Scale 0.574 2396 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0544 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0538 2397 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0555 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0584 2398 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0598 2399 2400 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2401 KM Mean (logged) -2.884 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0635 2402 KM SD (logged) 0.219 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.812 2403 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0631 2404 2405 DL/2 Statistics 2406 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2407 Mean in Original Scale 0.0388 Mean in Log Scale -3.403 2408 SD in Original Scale 0.0262 SD in Log Scale 0.521 2409 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0502 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0503 2410 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2411 2412 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2413 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2414 2415 Suggested UCL to Use 2416 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0654 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2417 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 2418 2419 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2420 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2421 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2422 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2423 2424 2425 Titanium 2426 2427 General Statistics 2428 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 11 2429 Number of Missing Observations 0 2430 Minimum 94 Mean 209.5 2431 Maximum 268 Median 215 2432 SD 56.59 Std. Error of Mean 14.15 2433 Coefficient of Variation 0.27 Skewness -0.459 2434 2435 Normal GOF Test 2436 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.887 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2437 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 2438 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.224 Lilliefors GOF Test 2439 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 2440 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 2441 2442 Assuming Normal Distribution 2443 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 2444 95% Student's -t UCL 7234.3 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 231 A B C D E F G H I I J I K L 2445 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 234 2446 2447 Gamma GOF Test 2448 A -D Test Statistic 0.699 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 2449 5% A -D Critical Value 0.738 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2450 K -S Test Statistic 0.217 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 2451 5% K -S Critical Value 0.215 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2452 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2453 2454 Gamma Statistics 2455 k hat (MLE) 12.58 k star (bias corrected MLE) 10.26 2456 Theta hat (MLE) 16.65 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 20.41 2457 nu hat (MLE) 402.6 nu star (bias corrected) 328.4 2458 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 209.5 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 65.39 2459 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 287.4 2460 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 283.1 2461 2462 Assuming Gamma Distribution 2463 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50) 239.4 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 243.1 2464 2465 Lognormal GOF Test 2466 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.868 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 2467 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2468 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.2 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 2469 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2470 Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2471 2472 Lognormal Statistics 2473 Minimum of Logged Data 4.543 Mean of logged Data 5.304 2474 Maximum of Logged Data 5.591 SD of logged Data 0.307 2475 2476 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 2477 95% H -UCL 244.8 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 259.3 2478 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 281.6 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 312.4 2479 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 372.9 2480 2481 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2482 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2483 2484 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 2485 95% CLT UCL 232.8 95% Jackknife UCL 234.3 2486 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 232.5 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 233 2487 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 229.7 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 232.3 2488 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 230.9 2489 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 251.9 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 271.2 2490 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 297.9 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 350.3 2491 2492 Suggested UCL to Use 2493 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 243.1 2494 2495 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2496 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 2497 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 2498 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2499 25001 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 2501 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 2502 2503 2504 Uranium 2505 2506 General Statistics 2507 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 13 2508 Number of Missing Observations 0 2509 Minimum 0.16 Mean 0.284 2510 Maximum 0.44 Median 0.27 2511 SD 0.0817 Std. Error of Mean 0.0204 2512 Coefficient of Variation 0.288 Skewness 0.44 2513 2514 Normal GOF Test 2515 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.958 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2516 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2517 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.157 Lilliefors GOF Test 2518 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2519 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2520 2521 Assuming Normal Distribution 2522 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 2523 95% Student's -t UCL 0.32 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.32 2524 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.32 2525 2526 Gamma GOF Test 2527 A -D Test Statistic 0.22 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 2528 5% A -D Critical Value 0.738 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2529 K -S Test Statistic 0.121 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 2530 5% K -S Critical Value 0.215 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2531 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2532 2533 Gamma Statistics 2534 k hat (MLE) 12.93 k star (bias corrected MLE) 10.54 2535 Theta hat (MLE) 0.022 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0269 2536 nu hat (MILE) 413.7 nu star (bias corrected) 337.4 2537 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.284 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0874 2538 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 295.9 2539 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 291.4 2540 2541 Assuming Gamma Distribution 2542 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 0.324 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.329 2543 2544 Lognormal GOF Test 2545 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.975 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 2546 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2547 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.117 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 2548 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 2549 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2550 2551 Lognormal Statistics 25521 Minimum of Logged Data -1.833 Mean of logged Data -1.299 2553 Maximum of Logged Data -0.821 SD of logged Data 0.291 2554 2555 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 2556 95% H -UCL 0.327 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.346 2557 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.375 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.414 2558 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.492 2559 2560 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2561 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2562 2563 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 2564 95% CLT UCL 0.317 95% Jackknife UCL 0.32 2565 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.316 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 0.323 2566 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.319 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.316 2567 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.319 2568 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.345 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.373 2569 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.411 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.487 2570 2571 Suggested UCL to Use 2572 95% Student's -t UCL 0.32 2573 2574 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2575 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 2576 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 2577 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2578 2579 Vanadium 2580 2581 General Statistics 2582 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 11 2583 Number of Detects 15 Number of Non -Detects 1 2584 Number of Distinct Detects 10 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2585 Minimum Detect 5.2 Minimum Non -Detect 5 2586 Maximum Detect 23 Maximum Non -Detect 5 2587 Variance Detects 24.76 Percent Non -Detects 6.25% 2588 Mean Detects 12.59 SD Detects 4.976 2589 Median Detects 11 CV Detects 0.395 2590 Skewness Detects 0.65 Kurtosis Detects -0.142 2591 Mean of Logged Detects 2.459 SD of Logged Detects 0.405 2592 2593 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2594 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.945 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2595 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2596 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.201 Lilliefors GOF Test 2597 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2598 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2599 126001 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs A B C D T E F G H I J K L 2601 Mean 12.12 Standard Error of Mean 1.295 2602 SD 5.005 95% KM (BCA) UCL 13.97 2603 95% KM (t) UCL 14.39 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 14.29 2604 95% KM (z) UCL 14.25 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 14.64 2605 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 16 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 17.76 2606 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 20.21 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 25 2607 2608 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2609 A -D Test Statistic 0.245 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2610 5% A -D Critical Value 0.738 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2611 K -S Test Statistic 0.15 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2612 5% K -S Critical Value 0.222 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2613 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2614 2615 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2616 k hat (MLE) 6.902 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.566 2617 Theta hat (MLE) 1.825 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.263 2618 nu hat (MLE) 207.1 nu star (bias corrected) 167 2619 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 12.59 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.338 2620 2621 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2622 k hat (KM) 5.864 nu hat (KM) 187.6 2623 Approximate Chi Square Value (187.65, a) 157 Adjusted Chi Square Value (187.65, R) 153.8 2624 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 14.49 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 14.79 2625 2626 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 2627 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 26281 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2629 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2630 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2631 Minimum 3.018 Mean 11.99 2632 Maximum 23 Median 11 2633 SD 5.37 CV 0.448 26341 k hat (MLE) 4.699 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.86 2635 Theta hat (MLE) 2.552 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.107 2636 nu hat (MLE) 150.4 nu star (bias corrected) 123.5 2637 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 11.99 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6.105 2638 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 2639 Approximate Chi Square Value (123.52, a) 98.85 Adjusted Chi Square Value (123.52, R) 96.34 2640 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 14.99 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 15.38 2641 2642 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2643 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.974 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2644 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2645 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.13 Lilliefors GOF Test 2646 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2647 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2648 2649 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2650 Mean in Original Scale 12.08 Mean in Log Scale 2.397 2651 SD in Original Scale 5.231 SD in Log Scale 0.463 2652 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 14.37 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 14.27 A B C I D I E F G H I J I K L 2653 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 14.34 95% Bootstrap t UCL 14.74 2654 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 15.56 2655 26561 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2657 KM Mean (logged) 2.406 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 15.17 2658 KM SD (logged) 0.431 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.982 2659 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.112 2660 2661 DL/2 Statistics 2662 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2663 Mean in Original Scale 11.96 Mean in Log Scale 2.363 2664 SD in Original Scale 5.429 SD in Log Scale 0.549 2665 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 14.34 95% H -Stat UCL 16.64 2666 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2667 2668 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2669 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2670 2671 Suggested UCL to Use 2672 95% KM (t) UCL 14.39 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 14.29 2673 2674 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2675 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2676 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2677 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2678 2679 2680 Zinc 2681 2682 General Statistics 2683 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 15 2684 Number of Missing Observations 0 2685 Minimum 11 Mean 29.5 2686 Maximum 62 Median 28 2687 SD 15.14 Std. Error of Mean 3.786 2688 Coefficient of Variation 0.513 Skewness 0.733 2689 2690 Normal GOF Test 2691 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.925 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2692 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2693 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.174 Lilliefors GOF Test 2694 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2695 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2696 2697 Assuming Normal Distribution 2698 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 2699 95% Student's -t UCL 36.14 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 36.47 2700 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 36.25 2701 2702 Gamma GOF Test 2703 A -D Test Statistic 0.293 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 2704 5% A -D Critical Value 0.742 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E F G H I I I J I K L 2705 K -S Test Statistic 0.142 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 2706 5% K -S Critical Value 0.216 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2707 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2708 2709 Gamma Statistics 2710 k hat (MLE) 4.111 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.382 2711 Theta hat (MLE) 7.177 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 8.724 2712 nu hat (MLE) 131.5 nu star (bias corrected) 108.2 2713 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 29.5 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 16.04 2714 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 85.2 2715 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0335 Adjusted Chi Square Value 82.88 2716 2717 Assuming Gamma Distribution 2718 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n-50)) 37.47 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 38.52 2719 2720 Lognormal GOF Test 2721 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.958 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 2722 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.887 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2723 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.134 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 2724 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.222 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2725 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2726 2727 Lognormal Statistics 2728 Minimum of Logged Data 2.398 Mean of logged Data 3.258 2729 Maximum of Logged Data 4.127 SD of logged Data 0.528 2730 2731 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 2732 95% H -UCL 39.66 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 41.71 2733 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 47.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 54.81 2734 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 69.78 2735 2736 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2737 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2738 2739 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 2740 95% CLT UCL 35.73 95% Jackknife UCL 36.14 2741 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 35.48 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 36.83 2742 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 36.85 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 35.63 2743 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 36.5 2744 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 40.86 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 46 2745 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 53.14 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 67.17 2746 2747 Suggested UCL to Use 2748 95% Student's -t UCL 36.14 2749 2750 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2751 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 2752 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 2753 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2754 2755 Anthracene 2756 A B C D E F I G H I J K L 2757 General Statistics 2758 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 3 2759 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 15 27601 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 2761 2762 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 2763 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 2764 2765 The data set for variable Anthracene was not processed! 2766 2767 2768 Benzo(a)anthracene 2769 2770 General Statistics 2771 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 10 2772 Number of Detects 11 Number of Non -Detects 5 2773 Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2774 Minimum Detect 0.006 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 2775 Maximum Detect 0.014 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 2776 Variance Detects 8.3842E-6 Percent Non -Detects 31.25% 2777 Mean Detects 0.00933 SD Detects 0.0029 2778 Median Detects 0.0078 CV Detects 0.31 2779 Skewness Detects 0.709 Kurtosis Detects -0.951 2780 Mean of Logged Detects -4.716 SD of Logged Detects 0.299 2781 2782 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2783 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.875 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2784 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2785 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.247 Lilliefors GOF Test 2786 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2787 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2788 2789 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2790 Mean 0.00798 Standard Error of Mean 7.9802E-4 2791 SD 0.00304 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00921 2792 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00937 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00926 2793 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00929 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0097 2794 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0104 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0115 2795 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.013 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0159 2796 2797 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2798 A -D Test Statistic 0.517 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2799 5% A -D Critical Value 0.729 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2800 K -S Test Statistic 0.24 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2801 5% K -S Critical Value 0.255 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2802 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2803 2804 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2805 k hat (MLE) 12.17 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.912 2806 Theta hat (MLE) 7.6635E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00105 2807 nu hat (MLE) 267.8 nu star (bias corrected) 196.1 128081 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00933 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00312 A B C D E F G H I J K L 2809 2810 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2811 k hat (KM) 6.866 nu hat (KM) 219.7 28121 Approximate Chi Square Value (219.71, a) 186.4 Adjusted Chi Square Value (219.71, R) 182.9 2813 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0094 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00958 2814 2815 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 2816 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 2817 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2818 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2819 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2820 Minimum 0.006 Mean 0.00954 2821 Maximum 0.014 Median 0.01 2822 SD 0.00239 CV 0.25 2823 k hat (MLE) 17.31 k star (bias corrected MLE) 14.11 2824 Theta hat (MLE) 5.5084E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.7595E-4 2825 nu hat (MLE) 554.1 nu star (bias corrected) 451.5 2826 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00954 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00254 2827 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 2828 Approximate Chi Square Value (451.51, a) 403.2 Adjusted Chi Square Value (451.51, R) 398.1 2829 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0107 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0108 2830 2831 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2832 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.911 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2833 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2834 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.222 Lilliefors GOF Test 2835 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 28361 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2837 2838 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2839 Mean in Original Scale 0.00775 Mean in Log Scale -4.952 2840 SD in Original Scale 0.00341 SD in Log Scale 0.446 2841 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00924 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00909 2842 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0093 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00945 2843 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00983 2844 2845 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2846 KM Mean (logged) -4.898 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0095 2847 KM SD (logged) 0.359 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.918 28481 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.094 2849 2850 DL/2 Statistics 2851 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2852 Mean in Original Scale 0.00719 Mean in Log Scale -5.115 2853 SD in Original Scale 0.00403 SD in Log Scale 0.657 2854 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00896 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0109 2855 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2856 2857 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2858 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2859 128601 Suggested UCL to Use A B C D I E I F G H I I J I K L 2861 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00937 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00926 2862 11 2863 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 28641 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2865 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2866 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2867 2868 Benzo(a)pyrene 2869 2870 General Statistics 2871 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 11 2872 Number of Detects 11 Number of Non-Detects 5 2873 Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non-Detects 2 2874 Minimum Detect 0.0052 Minimum Non-Detect 0.005 2875 Maximum Detect 0.016 Maximum Non-Detect 0.01 2876 Variance Detects 1.1417E-5 Percent Non-Detects 31.25% 2877 Mean Detects 0.00874 SD Detects 0.00338 2878 Median Detects 0.0079 CV Detects 0.387 2879 Skewness Detects 1.079 Kurtosis Detects 0.563 2880 Mean of Logged Detects -4.802 SD of Logged Detects 0.361 2881 2882 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2883 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.887 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2884 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2885 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.211 Lilliefors GOF Test 2886 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2887 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2888 2889 Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2890 Mean 0.00765 Standard Error of Mean 8.3344E-4 2891 SD 0.00315 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00915 2892 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00911 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00896 2893 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00902 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.00955 2894 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0102 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0113 2895 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0129 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0159 2896 2897 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2898 A-D Test Statistic 0.384 Anderson-Darling GOF Test 2899 5% A-D Critical Value 0.73 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2900 K-S Test Statistic 0.184 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2901 5% K-S Critical Value 0.256 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2902 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2903 2904 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2905 k hat (MILE) 8.262 k star (bias corrected MILE) 6.069 2906 Theta hat (MILE) 0.00106 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 0.00144 2907 nu hat (MILE) 181.8 nu star (bias corrected) 133.5 2908 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00874 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00355 2909 2910 Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics 2911 k hat (KM) 5.885 nu hat (KM) 188.3 2912 Approximate Chi Square Value (188.33, a) 157.6 Adjusted Chi Square Value (188.33, R) 154.4 A B I C I D I E I F G H I I I J I K L 2913 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00915 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00934 2914 2915 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 29161 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 2917 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2918 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2919 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2920 Minimum 0.0052 Mean 0.00913 2921 Maximum 0.016 Median 0.0099 2922 SD 0.00282 CV 0.309 2923 k hat (MLE) 11.42 k star (bias corrected MLE) 9.317 2924 Theta hat (MLE) 7.9985E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 9.8003E-4 2925 nu hat (MLE) 365.3 nu star (bias corrected) 298.2 2926 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00913 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00299 2927 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 2928 Approximate Chi Square Value (298.15, a) 259.2 Adjusted Chi Square Value (298.15, (3) 255 2929 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0105 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0107 2930 2931 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2932 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.941 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2933 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2934 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.168 Lilliefors GOF Test 2935 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2936 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2937 2938 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2939 Mean in Original Scale 0.00726 Mean in Log Scale -5.036 2940 SD in Original Scale 0.00362 SD in Log Scale 0.485 2941 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00884 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00877 2942 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0089 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00926 2943 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00943 2944 2945 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2946 KM Mean (logged) -4.944 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00911 2947 KM SD (logged) 0.362 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.921 2948 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0961 2949 2950 DL/2 Statistics 2951 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2952 Mean in Original Scale 0.00694 Mean in Log Scale -5.13 2953 SD in Original Scale 0.00394 SD in Log Scale 0.605 2954 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00867 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00996 2955 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2956 2957 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 29581 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2959 2960 Suggested UCL to Use 2961 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00911 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00896 2962 2963 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 129641 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. A B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K L 2965 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2966 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2967 29681 Benzo(bfj)fluoranthene 2969 2970 General Statistics 2971 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12 2972 Number of Detects 13 Number of Non -Detects 3 2973 Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2974 Minimum Detect 0.0059 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 2975 Maximum Detect 0.027 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 2976 Variance Detects 3.2061 E-5 Percent Non -Detects 18.75% 2977 Mean Detects 0.0138 SD Detects 0.00566 2978 Median Detects 0.013 CV Detects 0.411 2979 Skewness Detects 1.03 Kurtosis Detects 1.314 2980 Mean of Logged Detects -4.36 SD of Logged Detects 0.405 2981 2982 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2983 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.936 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2984 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2985 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.149 Lilliefors GOF Test 2986 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2987 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2988 2989 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2990 Mean 0.0121 Standard Error of Mean 0.00156 2991 SD 0.00598 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0148 2992 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0149 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0146 2993 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0147 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0153 2994 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0168 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0189 2995 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0218 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0276 2996 2997 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2998 A -D Test Statistic 0.163 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 299915% A -D Critical Value 0.735 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3000 K -S Test Statistic 0.13 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3001 5% K -S Critical Value 0.237 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3002 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3003 30041 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 30051 k hat (MLE) 6.824 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.301 3006 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00202 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0026 3007 nu hat (MLE) 177.4 nu star (bias corrected) 137.8 3008 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0138 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00598 3009 30101 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 30111 k hat (KM) 4.111 nu hat (KM) 131.6 3012 Approximate Chi Square Value (131.56, a) 106.1 Adjusted Chi Square Value (131.56, R) 103.5 3013 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.015 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0154 3014 3015 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 130161 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 3017 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3018 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3019 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 30201 Minimum 0.0059 Mean 0.0131 3021 Maximum 0.027 Median 0.011 3022 SD 0.00529 CV 0.405 3023 k hat (MLE) 7.487 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.125 3024 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00174 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00213 3025 nu hat (MLE) 239.6 nu star (bias corrected) 196 3026 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0131 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00528 3027 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 3028 Approximate Chi Square Value (196.00, a) 164.6 Adjusted Chi Square Value (196.00, (3) 161.3 3029 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0156 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0159 3030 3031 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3032 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.991 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3033 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3034 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.125 Lilliefors GOF Test 3035 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3036 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3037 3038 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3039 Mean in Original Scale 0.0121 Mean in Log Scale -4.541 3040 SD in Original Scale 0.0062 SD in Log Scale 0.535 3041 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0148 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0149 3042 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.015 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0155 3043 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0164 3044 3045 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3046 KM Mean (logged) -4.536 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0159 3047 KM SD (logged) 0.507 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.057 3048 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.132 3049 3050 DU2 Statistics 3051 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3052 Mean in Original Scale 0.0117 Mean in Log Scale -4.666 3053 SD in Original Scale 0.0068 SD in Log Scale 0.751 3054 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0146 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0196 3055 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3056 3057 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3058 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3059 3060 Suggested UCL to Use 3061 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0149 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0146 3062 3063 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3064 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3065 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3066 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3067 130681 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene A B C D E F G H I J K L 3069 3070 General Statistics 3071 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 8 30721 Number of Detects 7 Number of Non -Detects 9 3073 Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3074 Minimum Detect 0.005 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3075 Maximum Detect 0.014 Maximum Non -Detect 0.01 3076 Variance Detects 9.3057E-6 Percent Non -Detects 56.25% 3077 Mean Detects 0.00803 SD Detects 0.00305 3078 Median Detects 0.0075 CV Detects 0.38 3079 Skewness Detects 1.414 Kurtosis Detects 2.124 3080 Mean of Logged Detects -4.879 SD of Logged Detects 0.346 3081 3082 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3083 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.88 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3084 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3085 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.205 Lilliefors GOF Test 3086 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3087 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3088 3089 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3090 Mean 0.00638 Standard Error of Mean 6.5644E-4 3091 SD 0.0024 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00748 3092 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00753 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0075 3093 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00746 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.00843 3094 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00835 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00924 3095 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0105 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0129 3096 3097 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3098 A -D Test Statistic 0.29 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 3099 5% A -D Critical Value 0.709 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3100 K -S Test Statistic 0.184 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3101 5% K -S Critical Value 0.312 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3102 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3103 3104 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3105 k hat (MLE) 9.355 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.441 3106 Theta hat (MLE) 8.5819E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00148 3107 nu hat (MLE) 131 nu star (bias corrected) 76.18 3108 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00803 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00344 3109 3110 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3111 k hat (KM) 7.049 nu hat (KM) 225.6 3112 Approximate Chi Square Value (225.55, a) 191.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (225.55, R) 188.3 3113 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0075 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00764 3114 3115 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 3116 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 3117 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3118 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3119 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 131201 Minimum 0.005 Mean 0.00914 A B C D T E F G H I J K L 3121 Maximum 0.014 Median 0.01 3122 SD 0.00218 CV 0.238 3123 k hat (MLE) 17.02 k star (bias corrected MLE) 13.87 31241 Theta hat (MLE) 5.3689E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 6.5880E-4 3125 nu hat (MLE) 544.6 nu star (bias corrected) 443.8 3126 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00914 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00245 3127 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 3128 Approximate Chi Square Value (443.83, a) 396 Adjusted Chi Square Value (443.83, j3) 390.8 3129 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0102 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0104 3130 3131 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3132 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.955 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3133 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3134 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.166 Lilliefors GOF Test 3135 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3136 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3137 3138 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3139 Mean in Original Scale 0.00531 Mean in Log Scale -5.39 3140 SD in Original Scale 0.00321 SD in Log Scale 0.566 3141 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00672 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00661 3142 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00689 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00723 3143 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0073 3144 3145 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3146 KM Mean (logged) -5.106 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00731 3147 KM SD (logged) 0.298 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.87 3148 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0819 3149 3150 DU2 Statistics 3151 DL/2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 3152 Mean in Original Scale 0.00508 Mean in Log Scale -5.462 3153 SD in Original Scale 0.00337 SD in Log Scale 0.598 3154 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00655 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00709 3155 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3156 3157 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3158 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3159 3160 Suggested UCL to Use 3161 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00753 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0075 3162 3163 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3164 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3165 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3166 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3167 3168 Benzo(k)fluoranthene 3169 3170 General Statistics 3171 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 5 131721 Number of Detects 3 Number of Non -Detects 13 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K L 3173 Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3174 Minimum Detect 0.0058 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3175 Maximum Detect 0.0071 Maximum Non -Detect 0.01 31761 Variance Detects 5.2333E-7 Percent Non -Detects 81.25% 3177 Mean Detects 0.00627 SD Detects 7.2342E-4 3178 Median Detects 0.0059 CV Detects 0.115 3179 Skewness Detects 1.695 Kurtosis Detects N/A 3180 Mean of Logged Detects -5.077 SD of Logged Detects 0.112 3181 3182 Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values. 3183 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 3184 3185 3186 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3187 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.807 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3188 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3189 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.361 Lilliefors GOF Test 3190 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3191 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3192 3193 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3194 Mean 0.00527 Standard Error of Mean 1.9223E-4 3195 SD 5.8728E-4 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 3196 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00561 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3197 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00559 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 3198 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00585 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00611 3199 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00647 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00718 3200 3201 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3202 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3203 3204 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3205 k hat (MLE) 117.1 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 3206 Theta hat (MLE) 5.3519E-5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 3207 nu hat (MLE) 702.6 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 3208 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 3209 3210 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3211 k hat (KM) 80.57 nu hat (KM) 2578 3212 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 3213 Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, a) 2461 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, j3) 2448 3214 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00552 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00555 3215 3216 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3217 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.813 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3218 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3219 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.358 Lilliefors GOF Test 3220 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3221 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3222 3223 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 132241 Mean in Original Scale 0.00422 Mean in Log Scale -5.508 A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 3225 SD in Original Scale 0.00126 SD in Log Scale 0.291 3226 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00477 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00475 3227 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00476 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00488 3228 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00486 3229 3230 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3231 KM Mean (logged) -5.251 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00551 3232 KM SD (logged) 0.1 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.743 3233 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0328 3234 3235 DL/2 Statistics 3236 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3237 Mean in Original Scale 0.00352 Mean in Log Scale -5.733 3238 SD in Original Scale 0.00162 SD in Log Scale 0.402 3239 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00423 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0043 3240 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3241 3242 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3243 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3244 3245 Suggested UCL to Use 3246 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00561 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3247 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 3248 3249 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3250 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3251 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 32521 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3253 3254 Chrysene 3255 3256 General Statistics 3257 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 10 3258 Number of Detects 12 Number of Non -Detects 4 3259 Number of Distinct Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 3260 Minimum Detect 0.0054 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3261 Maximum Detect 0.02 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 3262 Variance Detects 1.6783E-5 Percent Non -Detects 25% 3263 Mean Detects 0.0107 SD Detects 0.0041 3264 Median Detects 0.0103 CV Detects 0.382 3265 Skewness Detects 0.903 Kurtosis Detects 1.1 3266 Mean of Logged Detects -4.601 SD of Logged Detects 0.379 3267 3268 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3269 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.932 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3270 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3271 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.139 Lilliefors GOF Test 3272 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.256 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3273 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3274 3275 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 132761 Mean 0.00929 Standard Error of Mean 0.0011 A B C D E F G H I J I K L 3277 SD 0.0042 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.011 3278 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0112 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.011 3279 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0111 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0117 3280 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0126 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0141 3281 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0161 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0202 3282 3283 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3284 A -D Test Statistic 0.224 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 3285 5% A -D Critical Value 0.731 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3286 K -S Test Statistic 0.12 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3287 5% K -S Critical Value 0.246 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3288 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3289 3290 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3291 k hat (MLE) 7.824 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.924 3292 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00137 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00181 3293 nu hat (MLE) 187.8 nu star (bias corrected) 142.2 3294 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0107 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0044 3295 3296 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3297 k hat (KM) 4.883 nu hat (KM) 156.2 3298 Approximate Chi Square Value (156.25, a) 128.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (156.25, R) 125.5 3299 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0113 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0116 3300 3301 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 3302 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 3303 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 33041 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3305 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 3306 Minimum 0.0054 Mean 0.0105 3307 Maximum 0.02 Median 0.01 3308 SD 0.00352 CV 0.334 3309 k hat (MLE) 10.29 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.4 33101 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00102 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00125 3311 nu hat (MLE) 329.2 nu star (bias corrected) 268.8 3312 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0105 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00364 3313 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 3314 Approximate Chi Square Value (268.80, a) 231.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (268.80, R) 227.9 3315 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0122 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0124 3316 3317 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3318 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.969 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3319 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.859 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3320 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.119 Lilliefors GOF Test 3321 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.256 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 33221 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3323 3324 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3325 Mean in Original Scale 0.00905 Mean in Log Scale -4.831 3326 SD in Original Scale 0.00461 SD in Log Scale 0.531 3327 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0111 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0109 3328 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0111 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0114 A B C D I E F G H I J K L 3329 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0122 3330 3331 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 33321 KM Mean (logged) -4.775 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0116 3333 KM SD (logged) 0.436 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.987 3334 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.114 3335 3336 DL/2 Statistics 3337 DL/2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 3338 Mean in Original Scale 0.00866 Mean in Log Scale -4.949 3339 SD in Original Scale 0.00508 SD in Log Scale 0.701 3340 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0109 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0137 3341 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3342 3343 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3344 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3345 3346 Suggested UCL to Use 3347 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0112 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.011 3348 3349 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3350 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3351 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3352 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3353 3354 Fluoranthene 3355 3356 General Statistics 3357 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 13 3358 Number of Detects 15 Number of Non -Detects 1 3359 Number of Distinct Detects 12 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 3360 Minimum Detect 0.0062 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3361 Maximum Detect 0.04 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 3362 Variance Detects 1.0058E-4 Percent Non -Detects 6.25% 3363 Mean Detects 0.0197 SD Detects 0.01 3364 Median Detects 0.018 CV Detects 0.509 3365 Skewness Detects 0.488 Kurtosis Detects -0.373 3366 Mean of Logged Detects -4.067 SD of Logged Detects 0.577 3367 3368 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3369 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.951 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3370 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3371 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.143 Lilliefors GOF Test 3372 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3373 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3374 3375 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3376 Mean 0.0188 Standard Error of Mean 0.0026 3377 SD 0.01 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.023 3378 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0233 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0233 3379 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0231 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0235 3380 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1 0.0266 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0301 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K L 3381 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.035 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0446 3382 3383 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3384 A -D Test Statistic 0.272 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 3385 5% A -D Critical Value 0.741 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3386 K -S Test Statistic 0.126 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3387 5% K -S Critical Value 0.223 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3388 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3389 3390 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3391 k hat (MLE) 3.74 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.036 3392 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00527 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00649 3393 nu hat (MLE) 112.2 nu star (bias corrected) 91.08 3394 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0197 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0113 3395 3396 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3397 k hat (KM) 3.504 nu hat (KM) 112.1 3398 Approximate Chi Square Value (112.12, a) 88.68 Adjusted Chi Square Value (112.12, R) 86.31 3399 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0237 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0244 3400 3401 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 3402 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 3403 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3404 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3405 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 3406 Minimum 0.0062 Mean 0.0191 3407 Maximum 0.04 Median 0.0175 3408 SD 0.00999 CV 0.523 3409 k hat (MLE) 3.679 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.031 3410 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00519 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0063 3411 nu hat (MLE) 117.7 nu star (bias corrected) 96.99 3412 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0191 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.011 3413 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 34141 Approximate Chi Square Value (96.99, a) 75.27 Adjusted Chi Square Value (96.99, R) 73.1 3415 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0246 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0253 3416 3417 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3418 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.935 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3419 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 34201 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.161 Lilliefors GOF Test 3421 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3422 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3423 3424 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3425 Mean in Original Scale 0.0187 Mean in Log Scale -4.154 34261 SD in Original Scale 0.0104 SD in Log Scale 0.657 3427 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0233 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0227 3428 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0231 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0236 3429 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0284 3430 3431 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 134321 KM Mean (logged) -4.144 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0271 A B C D I E F G H I I J I K L 3433 KM SD (logged) 0.617 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.179 3434 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.16 3435 3436 DL/2 Statistics 3437 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3438 Mean in Original Scale 0.0186 Mean in Log Scale -4.187 3439 SD in Original Scale 0.0106 SD in Log Scale 0.736 3440 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0233 95% H -Stat UCL 0.031 3441 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3442 3443 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3444 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3445 3446 Suggested UCL to Use 3447 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0233 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0233 3448 3449 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3450 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3451 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3452 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3453 3454 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 3455 3456 General Statistics 3457 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 8 3458 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 7 3459 Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3460 Minimum Detect 0.005 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3461 Maximum Detect 0.013 Maximum Non -Detect 0.01 3462 Variance Detects 5.9686E-6 Percent Non -Detects 43.75% 3463 Mean Detects 0.00739 SD Detects 0.00244 3464 Median Detects 0.0069 CV Detects 0.331 3465 Skewness Detects 1.726 Kurtosis Detects 3.304 3466 Mean of Logged Detects -4.948 SD of Logged Detects 0.29 3467 3468 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3469 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.828 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3470 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 3471 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.246 Lilliefors GOF Test 3472 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3473 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 3474 3475 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3476 Mean 0.0064 Standard Error of Mean 5.6159E-4 3477 SD 0.00209 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00743 3478 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00739 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00733 3479 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00733 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0082 3480 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00809 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00885 3481 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00991 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.012 3482 3483 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3484 A -D Test Statistic 0.478 Anderson -Darling GOF Test A B C D I E F G I H I I I J I K I L 3485 5% A -D Critical Value 0.722 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3486 K -S Test Statistic 0.224 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3487 5% K -S Critical Value 0.279 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 34881 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3489 3490 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3491 k hat (MLE) 12.47 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.385 3492 Theta hat (MLE) 5.9272E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 8.8122E-4 3493 nu hat (MLE) 224.4 nu star (bias corrected) 150.9 3494 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00739 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00255 3495 3496 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3497 k hat (KM) 9.364 nu hat (KM) 299.6 3498 Approximate Chi Square Value (299.64, a) 260.5 Adjusted Chi Square Value (299.64, R) 256.4 3499 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00737 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00748 3500 3501 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 3502 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 3503 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3504 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3505 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 35061 Minimum 0.005 Mean 0.00853 3507 Maximum 0.013 Median 0.0095 3508 SD 0.00223 CV 0.261 3509 k hat (MLE) 14.77 k star (bias corrected MLE) 12.04 3510 Theta hat (MLE) 5.7754E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.0836E-4 3511 nu hat (MLE) 472.7 nu star (bias corrected) 385.4 35121 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00853 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00246 3513 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 3514 Approximate Chi Square Value (385.40, a) 340.9 Adjusted Chi Square Value (385.40, R) 336.1 3515 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00964 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00978 3516 3517 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 35181 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.913 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3519 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3520 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.205 Lilliefors GOF Test 3521 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3522 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3523 35241 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3525 Mean in Original Scale 0.00579 Mean in Log Scale -5.239 3526 SD in Original Scale 0.00264 SD in Log Scale 0.428 3527 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00695 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00688 3528 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00716 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00731 3529 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00724 3530 3531 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3532 KM Mean (logged) -5.092 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00724 3533 KM SD (logged) 0.269 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.847 3534 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0724 3535 3536 DL/2 Statistics A B C I D E F G H I I J K L 3537 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3538 Mean in Original Scale 0.00541 Mean in Log Scale -5.361 3539 SD in Original Scale 0.00299 SD in Log Scale 0.553 3540 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00672 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00739 3541 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3542 3543 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3544 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3545 3546 Suggested UCL to Use 3547 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00739 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00733 3548 3549 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3550 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3551 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3552 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3553 3554 Methylnaphthalene, 1- 3555 3556 General Statistics 3557 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 4 3558 Number of Detects 3 Number of Non -Detects 13 3559 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3560 Minimum Detect 0.0052 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3561 Maximum Detect 0.0065 Maximum Non -Detect 0.01 3562 Variance Detects 5.6333E-7 Percent Non -Detects 81.25% 3563 Mean Detects 0.00563 SD Detects 7.5056E-4 3564 Median Detects 0.0052 CV Detects 0.133 3565 Skewness Detects 1.732 Kurtosis Detects N/A 3566 Mean of Logged Detects -5.185 SD of Logged Detects 0.129 3567 3568 Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values. 3569 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 3570 3571 3572 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3573 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3574 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 3575 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 3576 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3577 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 3578 3579 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3580 Mean 0.00514 Standard Error of Mean 1.2593E-4 3581 SD 3.8472E-4 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 3582 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00536 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3583 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00534 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 3584 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00551 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00568 3585 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00592 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00639 3586 3587 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 135881 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test A B C D E F G H I J K L 3589 3590 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3591 k hat (MLE) 88.48 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 35921 Theta hat (MLE) 6.3667E-5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 3593 nu hat (MLE) 530.9 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 3594 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 3595 3596 Gamma Kaplan-Meier (KM) Statistics 3597 k hat (KM) 178.2 nu hat (KM) 5702 3598 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0335 3599 Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, a) 5528 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, (3) 5508 3600 95% Gamma Approximate KM-UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0053 95% Gamma Adjusted KM-UCL (use when n<50) 0.00532 3601 3602 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3603 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3604 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3605 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 3606 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3607 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3608 3609 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non-Detects 3610 Mean in Original Scale 0.00364 Mean in Log Scale -5.666 3611 SD in Original Scale 0.00122 SD in Log Scale 0.325 3612 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00417 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00416 3613 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00417 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00426 3614 95% H-UCL (Log ROS) 0.00428 3615 3616 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3617 KM Mean (logged) -5.274 95% H-UCL (KM -Log) N/A 3618 KM SD (logged) 0.0674 95% Critical H Value (KM-Log) N/A 3619 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0221 3620 3621 DL/2 Statistics 3622 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log-Transformed 3623 Mean in Original Scale 0.0034 Mean in Log Scale -5.754 3624 SD in Original Scale 0.00142 SD in Log Scale 0.369 3625 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00402 95% H-Stat UCL 0.00408 3626 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3627 3628 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3629 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3630 3631 Suggested UCL to Use 3632 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00536 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3633 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 3634 3635 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3636 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3637 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3638 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3639 3640 Methylnaphthalene, 2- A B C D E F G H I J K L 3641 3642 General Statistics 3643 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 3 36441 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 15 3645 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3646 3647 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 3648 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 3649 3650 The data set for variable Methylnaphthalene, 2- was not processed! 3651 3652 3653 Phenanthrene 3654 3655 General Statistics 3656 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 14 3657 Number of Detects 13 Number of Non -Detects 3 3658 Number of Distinct Detects 13 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 3659 Minimum Detect 0.0052 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3660 Maximum Detect 0.033 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 3661 Variance Detects 5.2858E-5 Percent Non -Detects 18.75% 3662 Mean Detects 0.0111 SD Detects 0.00727 3663 Median Detects 0.009 CV Detects 0.657 3664 Skewness Detects 2.595 Kurtosis Detects 7.668 3665 Mean of Logged Detects -4.635 SD of Logged Detects 0.488 3666 3667 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3668 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.695 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3669 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 3670 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.241 Lilliefors GOF Test 3671 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3672 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 3673 3674 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3675 Mean 0.00993 Standard Error of Mean 0.00175 3676 SD 0.00673 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.013 3677 95% KM (t) UCL 0.013 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0129 3678 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0128 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0158 3679 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0152 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0176 3680 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0209 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0273 3681 3682 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3683 A -D Test Statistic 0.696 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 3684 5% A -D Critical Value 0.737 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3685 K -S Test Statistic 0.173 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3686 5% K -S Critical Value 0.238 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3687 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3688 3689 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3690 k hat (MLE) 3.978 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.111 3691 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00278 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00356 3692 nu hat (MLE) 103.4 nu star (bias corrected) 80.89 A B C I D I E F G H I J I K L 3693 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0111 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00627 3694 3695 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 36961 k hat (KM) 2.177 nu hat (KM) 69.68 3697 Approximate Chi Square Value (69.68, a) 51.46 Adjusted Chi Square Value (69.68, R) 49.68 3698 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0134 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0139 3699 3700 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 3701 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 37021 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3703 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3704 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 3705 Minimum 0.0052 Mean 0.0109 3706 Maximum 0.033 Median 0.0097 3707 SD 0.00652 CV 0.6 37081 k hat (MLE) 4.827 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.964 3709 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00225 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00274 3710 nu hat (MLE) 154.5 nu star (bias corrected) 126.8 3711 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0109 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00546 3712 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 3713 Approximate Chi Square Value (126.84, a) 101.8 Adjusted Chi Square Value (126.84, R) 99.28 3714 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0135 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0139 3715 3716 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3717 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.909 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3718 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.866 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3719 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.153 Lilliefors GOF Test 3720 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.246 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3721 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3722 3723 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3724 Mean in Original Scale 0.00958 Mean in Log Scale -4.849 3725 SD in Original Scale 0.00725 SD in Log Scale 0.638 3726 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0128 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0127 3727 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0138 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0155 3728 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0138 3729 3730 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3731 KM Mean (logged) -4.76 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0126 3732 KM SD (logged) 0.495 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.045 3733 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.129 3734 3735 DL/2 Statistics 3736 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3737 Mean in Original Scale 0.00946 Mean in Log Scale -4.89 3738 SD in Original Scale 0.00736 SD in Log Scale 0.699 3739 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0127 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0145 3740 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3741 3742 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3743 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3744 A B C D E F I G H I J K L 3745 Suggested UCL to Use 3746 95% KM (t) UCL 0.013 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0129 3747 37481 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3749 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3750 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3751 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3752 3753 Pyrene 3754 3755 General Statistics 3756 Total Number of Observations 16 Number of Distinct Observations 12 3757 Number of Detects 15 Number of Non -Detects 1 3758 Number of Distinct Detects 12 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 3759 Minimum Detect 0.005 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 3760 Maximum Detect 0.031 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 3761 Variance Detects 6.2107E-5 Percent Non -Detects 6.25% 3762 Mean Detects 0.0161 SD Detects 0.00788 3763 Median Detects 0.015 CV Detects 0.489 3764 Skewness Detects 0.474 Kurtosis Detects -0.577 3765 Mean of Logged Detects -4.253 SD of Logged Detects 0.541 3766 3767 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3768 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.95 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3769 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3770 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.156 Lilliefors GOF Test 3771 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3772 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 3773 3774 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3775 Mean 0.0154 Standard Error of Mean 0.00203 3776 SD 0.00785 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0186 3777 95% KM (t) UCL 0.019 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0188 3778 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0188 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0192 3779 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0215 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0243 3780 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0281 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0356 3781 3782 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3783 A -D Test Statistic 0.227 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 3784 5% A -D Critical Value 0.74 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3785 K -S Test Statistic 0.121 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 3786 5% K -S Critical Value 0.222 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3787 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3788 3789 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3790 k hat (MLE) 4.15 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.364 3791 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00388 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00479 3792 nu hat (MLE) 124.5 nu star (bias corrected) 100.9 3793 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0161 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00879 3794 3795 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3796 k hat (KM) 3.861 nu hat (KM) 123.5 A B I C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 3797 Approximate Chi Square Value (123.54, a) 98.87 Adjusted Chi Square Value (123.54, (3) 96.36 3798 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0193 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0198 3799 38001 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 38011 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 3802 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3803 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 3804 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 3805 Minimum 0.005 Mean 0.0157 38061 Maximum 0.031 Median 0.015 38071 SD 0.00777 CV 0.494 3808 k hat (MLE) 4.215 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.466 3809 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00373 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00454 3810 nu hat (MLE) 134.9 nu star (bias corrected) 110.9 3811 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0157 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00845 38121 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0335 3813 Approximate Chi Square Value (110.92, a) 87.61 Adjusted Chi Square Value (110.92, R) 85.25 3814 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0199 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0205 3815 3816 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3817 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.956 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 3818 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.881 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3819 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.155 Lilliefors GOF Test 3820 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.229 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3821 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 3822 3823 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 38241 Mean in Original Scale 0.0153 Mean in Log Scale -4.336 3825 SD in Original Scale 0.00821 SD in Log Scale 0.618 3826 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0189 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0186 3827 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0187 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0192 3828 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0224 3829 38301 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 3831 KM Mean (logged) -4.319 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0213 3832 KM SD (logged) 0.566 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.121 3833 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.146 3834 3835 DL/2 Statistics 38361 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3837 Mean in Original Scale 0.0153 Mean in Log Scale -4.362 3838 SD in Original Scale 0.00834 SD in Log Scale 0.68 3839 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0189 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0239 3840 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3841 38421 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 3843 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3844 3845 Suggested UCL to Use 3846 95% KM (t) UCL 0.019 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0188 3847 3848 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 3849 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3850 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3851 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3852 3853 DDD, o,p'- 3854 3855 General Statistics 3856 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 2 3857 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 12 3858 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3859 3860 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 3861 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 3862 3863 The data set for variable DDD, o,p'- was not processed! 3864 3865 3866 DDD (p,p'-DDD) 3867 3868 General Statistics 3869 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 4 3870 Number of Detects 2 Number of Non -Detects 11 3871 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 3872 Minimum Detect 0.004 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 3873 Maximum Detect 0.009 Maximum Non -Detect 0.003 3874 Variance Detects 1.2500E-5 Percent Non -Detects 84.62% 3875 Mean Detects 0.0065 SD Detects 0.00354 3876 Median Detects 0.0065 CV Detects 0.544 3877 Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A 3878 Mean of Logged Detects -5.116 SD of Logged Detects 0.573 3879 3880 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 3881 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 3882 3883 3884 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3885 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3886 3887 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3888 Mean 0.00269 Standard Error of Mean 7.4396E-4 3889 SD 0.0019 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 3890 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00402 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3891 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00392 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 3892 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00492 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00594 3893 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00734 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0101 3894 3895 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3896 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3897 3898 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3899 k hat (MLE) 6.409 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 139001 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00101 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 3901 nu hat (MLE) 25.63 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 3902 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 3903 39041 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3905 k hat (KM) 2.015 nu hat (KM) 52.38 3906 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0301 3907 Approximate Chi Square Value (52.38, a) 36.76 Adjusted Chi Square Value (52.38, R) 34.9 3908 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00384 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00404 3909 39101 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3911 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3912 3913 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3914 Mean in Original Scale 0.00125 Mean in Log Scale -8.281 3915 SD in Original Scale 0.00256 SD in Log Scale 1.906 3916 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00252 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00248 3917 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00316 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00945 3918 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0192 3919 3920 DL/2 Statistics 3921 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 39221 Mean in Original Scale 0.00192 Mean in Log Scale -6.57 3923 SD in Original Scale 0.00228 SD in Log Scale 0.683 3924 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00305 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00281 3925 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3926 3927 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 39281 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 3929 3930 Suggested UCL to Use 3931 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00402 I 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3932 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 3933 39341 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 3935 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 3936 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 3937 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 3938 3939 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- 3940 3941 General Statistics 3942 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 4 3943 Number of Detects 2 Number of Non -Detects 11 3944 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 39451 Minimum Detect 0.004 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 3946 Maximum Detect 0.012 Maximum Non -Detect 0.003 3947 Variance Detects 3.2000E-5 Percent Non -Detects 84.62% 3948 Mean Detects 0.008 SD Detects 0.00566 3949 Median Detects 0.008 CV Detects 0.707 3950 Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A 139511 Mean of Logged Detects -4.972 SD of Logged Detects 0.777 3952 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 3953 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 3954 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 3955 3956 3957 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3958 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3959 3960 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 3961 Mean 0.00292 Standard Error of Mean 0.00105 3962 SD 0.00267 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 3963 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00479 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 3964 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00465 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 3965 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00607 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00749 3966 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00947 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0134 3967 3968 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 3969 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3970 3971 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 3972 k hat (MLE) 3.634 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 3973 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0022 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 3974 nu hat (MLE) 14.54 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 3975 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 3976 3977 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 3978 k hat (KM) 1.195 nu hat (KM) 31.08 3979 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0301 39801 Approximate Chi Square Value (31.08, a) 19.34 Adjusted Chi Square Value (31.08, R) 18.03 3981 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0047 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00504 3982 3983 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 3984 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 3985 39861 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 3987 Mean in Original Scale 0.00136 Mean in Log Scale -9.26 3988 SD in Original Scale 0.00338 SD in Log Scale 2.581 3989 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00303 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00293 3990 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00403 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0211 3991 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.24 3992 3993 DL/2 Statistics 3994 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 3995 Mean in Original Scale 0.00215 Mean in Log Scale -6.548 3996 SD in Original Scale 0.00307 SD in Log Scale 0.749 3997 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00367 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00322 39981 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 3999 4000 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 4001 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 4002 4003 Suggested UCL to Use 4004 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00479 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 4005 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 4006 4007 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 40081 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 4009 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 4010 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 4011 4012 DDE (p,p'-DDE) 4013 4014 General Statistics 4015 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 12 4016 Number of Detects 11 Number of Non -Detects 2 4017 Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 4018 Minimum Detect 0.0022 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 4019 Maximum Detect 0.019 Maximum Non -Detect 0.002 4020 Variance Detects 2.3243E-5 Percent Non -Detects 15.38% 4021 Mean Detects 0.00584 SD Detects 0.00482 4022 Median Detects 0.004 CV Detects 0.826 4023 Skewness Detects 2.377 Kurtosis Detects 6.214 4024 Mean of Logged Detects -5.353 SD of Logged Detects 0.626 4025 4026 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 4027 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.711 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 4028 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 4029 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test 4030 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 4031 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 4032 4033 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 4034 Mean 0.00525 Standard Error of Mean 0.00129 4035 SD 0.00445 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00723 4036 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00755 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00738 4037 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00737 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0108 4038 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00913 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0109 4039 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0133 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0181 4040 4041 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 4042 A -D Test Statistic 0.564 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 4043 5% A -D Critical Value 0.736 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4044 K -S Test Statistic 0.182 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 4045 5% K -S Critical Value 0.258 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4046 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4047 4048 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 4049 k hat (MLE) 2.54 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.908 4050 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0023 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00306 4051 nu hat (MLE) 55.88 nu star (bias corrected) 41.98 4052 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00584 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00423 4053 4054 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 4055 k hat (KM) 1.39 nu hat (KM) 36.15 4056 Approximate Chi Square Value (36.15, a) 23.39 Adjusted Chi Square Value (36.15, R) 21.94 A B I C I D I E I F G H I I I J I K L 4057 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00811 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00865 4058 4059 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 40601 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 4061 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 4062 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 4063 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 4064 Minimum 0.0022 Mean 0.00648 4065 Maximum 0.019 Median 0.005 4066 SD 0.00467 CV 0.721 4067 k hat (MLE) 2.672 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.107 4068 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00242 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00307 4069 nu hat (MLE) 69.48 nu star (bias corrected) 54.78 4070 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00648 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00446 4071 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0301 40721 Approximate Chi Square Value (54.78, a) 38.77 Adjusted Chi Square Value (54.78, R) 36.86 4073 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00915 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00963 4074 4075 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 4076 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.93 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 4077 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 40781 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.151 Lilliefors GOF Test 4079 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4080 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4081 4082 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 4083 Mean in Original Scale 0.0051 Mean in Log Scale -5.583 40841 SD in Original Scale 0.00475 SD in Log Scale 0.804 4085 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00745 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00738 4086 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00807 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00981 4087 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00934 4088 4089 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 40901 KM Mean (logged) -5.486 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00766 4091 KM SD (logged) 0.631 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.276 4092 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.184 4093 4094 DL/2 Statistics 4095 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 40961 Mean in Original Scale 0.00509 Mean in Log Scale -5.592 4097 SD in Original Scale 0.00476 SD in Log Scale 0.817 4098 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00745 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00949 4099 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 4100 4101 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 41021 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4103 4104 Suggested UCL to Use 4105 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00755 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00738 4106 4107 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 141081 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. A B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K L 4109 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 4110 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 4111 4112 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- 4113 4114 General Statistics 4115 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 12 4116 Number of Detects 11 Number of Non -Detects 2 4117 Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 4118 Minimum Detect 0.0022 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 4119 Maximum Detect 0.019 Maximum Non -Detect 0.002 4120 Variance Detects 2.3243E-5 Percent Non -Detects 15.38% 4121 Mean Detects 0.00584 SD Detects 0.00482 4122 Median Detects 0.004 CV Detects 0.826 4123 Skewness Detects 2.377 Kurtosis Detects 6.214 4124 Mean of Logged Detects -5.353 SD of Logged Detects 0.626 4125 4126 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 4127 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.711 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 4128 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 41291 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.263 Lilliefors GOF Test 4130 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 4131 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 4132 4133 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 4134 Mean 0.00525 Standard Error of Mean 0.00129 41351 SD 0.00445 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.00742 4136 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00755 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00742 4137 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00737 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0109 4138 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00913 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0109 4139 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0133 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0181 4140 4141 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 4142 A -D Test Statistic 0.564 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 4143 5% A -D Critical Value 0.736 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4144 K -S Test Statistic 0.182 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 4145 5% K -S Critical Value 0.258 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4146 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4147 4148 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 4149 k hat (MLE) 2.54 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.908 4150 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0023 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00306 4151 nu hat (MLE) 55.88 nu star (bias corrected) 41.98 4152 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00584 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00423 4153 4154 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 4155 k hat (KM) 1.39 nu hat (KM) 36.15 4156 Approximate Chi Square Value (36.15, a) 23.39 Adjusted Chi Square Value (36.15, R) 21.94 4157 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00811 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00865 4158 4159 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 4160 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 4161 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 4162 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 4163 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 41641 Minimum 0.0022 Mean 0.00648 4165 Maximum 0.019 Median 0.005 4166 SD 0.00467 CV 0.721 4167 k hat (MLE) 2.672 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.107 4168 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00242 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00307 4169 nu hat (MLE) 69.48 nu star (bias corrected) 54.78 4170 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00648 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00446 4171 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0301 4172 Approximate Chi Square Value (54.78, a) 38.77 Adjusted Chi Square Value (54.78, R) 36.86 4173 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00915 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00963 4174 41751 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 4176 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.93 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 4177 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4178 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.151 Lilliefors GOF Test 4179 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4180 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4181 4182 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 4183 Mean in Original Scale 0.0051 Mean in Log Scale -5.583 4184 SD in Original Scale 0.00475 SD in Log Scale 0.804 4185 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00745 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00738 4186 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00805 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00985 4187 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00934 4188 4189 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 4190 KM Mean (logged) -5.486 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00766 4191 KM SD (logged) 0.631 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.276 4192 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.184 4193 4194 DU2 Statistics 4195 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 4196 Mean in Original Scale 0.00509 Mean in Log Scale -5.592 4197 SD in Original Scale 0.00476 SD in Log Scale 0.817 4198 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00745 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00949 4199 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 4200 4201 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 4202 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4203 4204 Suggested UCL to Use 4205 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00755 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.00742 4206 4207 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 4208 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 4209 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 4210 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 4211 4212 DDT (p,p'-DDT) A B C D E F G H I J K L 4213 4214 General Statistics 4215 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 3 42161 Number of Detects 2 Number of Non -Detects 11 4217 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 4218 Minimum Detect 0.003 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 4219 Maximum Detect 0.0044 Maximum Non -Detect 0.003 4220 Variance Detects 9.8000E-7 Percent Non -Detects 84.62% 4221 Mean Detects 0.0037 SD Detects 9.8995E-4 4222 Median Detects 0.0037 CV Detects 0.268 4223 Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A 4224 Mean of Logged Detects -5.618 SD of Logged Detects 0.271 4225 4226 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 4227 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 4228 4229 4230 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 4231 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 4232 4233 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 4234 Mean 0.00226 Standard Error of Mean 2.6358E-4 4235 SD 6.7201 E-4 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 4236 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00273 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 4237 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0027 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 4238 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00305 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00341 4239 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00391 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00488 4240 4241 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 4242 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 4243 4244 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 4245 k hat (MLE) 27.6 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 4246 Theta hat (MLE) 1.3405E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 4247 nu hat (MLE) 110.4 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 4248 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 4249 4250 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 4251 k hat (KM) 11.33 nu hat (KM) 294.5 4252 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0301 4253 Approximate Chi Square Value (294.46, a) 255.7 Adjusted Chi Square Value (294.46, (3) 250.6 4254 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0026 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00266 4255 4256 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 4257 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 4258 4259 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 4260 Mean in Original Scale 0.00121 Mean in Log Scale -7.116 4261 SD in Original Scale 0.00122 SD in Log Scale 0.915 4262 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00181 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00178 4263 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00188 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0025 4264 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 1 0.00252 A B C D E F G H I J K L 4265 4266 DL/2 Statistics 4267 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 42681 Mean in Original Scale 0.00145 Mean in Log Scale -6.678 4269 SD in Original Scale 0.00105 SD in Log Scale 0.49 4270 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00197 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00191 4271 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 4272 4273 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 4274 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 4275 4276 Suggested UCL to Use 4277 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00273 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A 4278 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 4279 4280 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 4281 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 4282 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 4283 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 4284 4285 DDT, o,p'- + DDT, p,p'- 4286 4287 General Statistics 4288 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 3 4289 Number of Detects 2 Number of Non -Detects 11 4290 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 4291 Minimum Detect 0.003 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 4292 Maximum Detect 0.0044 Maximum Non -Detect 0.003 4293 Variance Detects 9.8000E-7 Percent Non -Detects 84.62% 4294 Mean Detects 0.0037 SD Detects 9.8995E-4 4295 Median Detects 0.0037 CV Detects 0.268 4296 Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A 4297 Mean of Logged Detects -5.618 SD of Logged Detects 0.271 4298 4299 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 4300 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 4301 4302 4303 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 4304 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 4305 4306 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 4307 Mean 0.00226 Standard Error of Mean 2.6358E-4 4308 SD 6.7201 E-4 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 4309 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00273 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 4310 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0027 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 4311 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00305 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00341 4312 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00391 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00488 4313 4314 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 4315 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 4316 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 4317 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 4318 k hat (MLE) 27.6 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 4319 Theta hat (MLE) 1.3405E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 43201 nu hat (MLE) 110.4 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 4321 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 4322 4323 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 4324 k hat (KM) 11.33 nu hat (KM) 294.5 4325 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0301 43261 Approximate Chi Square Value (294.46, a) 255.7 Adjusted Chi Square Value (294.46, R) 250.6 4327 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0026 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00266 4328 4329 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 4330 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 4331 43321 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 4333 Mean in Original Scale 0.00121 Mean in Log Scale -7.116 4334 SD in Original Scale 0.00122 SD in Log Scale 0.915 4335 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00181 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00177 4336 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00191 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00259 4337 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00252 4338 4339 DL/2 Statistics 4340 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 4341 Mean in Original Scale 0.00145 Mean in Log Scale -6.678 4342 SD in Original Scale 0.00105 SD in Log Scale 0.49 4343 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00197 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00191 43441 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 4345 4346 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 4347 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 4348 4349 Suggested UCL to Use 4350 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00273 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A 4351 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 4352 4353 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 4354 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 4355 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 43561 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 4357 4358 DDT + Metabolites 4359 4360 General Statistics 4361 Total Number of Observations 13 Number of Distinct Observations 12 43621 Number of Detects 11 Number of Non -Detects 2 4363 Number of Distinct Detects 11 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 4364 Minimum Detect 0.0022 Minimum Non -Detect 0.002 4365 Maximum Detect 0.034 Maximum Non -Detect 0.002 4366 Variance Detects 8.6548E-5 Percent Non -Detects 15.38% 4367 Mean Detects 0.008 SD Detects 0.0093 143681 Median Detects 0.004 CV Detects 1.163 A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 4369 Skewness Detects 2.588 Kurtosis Detects 7.142 4370 Mean of Logged Detects -5.209 SD of Logged Detects 0.824 4371 43721 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 4373 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.642 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 4374 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 4375 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.291 Lilliefors GOF Test 4376 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 4377 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 4378 4379 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 4380 Mean 0.00708 Standard Error of Mean 0.00246 4381 SD 0.00844 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0117 4382 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0115 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0113 4383 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0111 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0202 4384 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0144 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0178 4385 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0224 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0315 4386 4387 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 4388 A -D Test Statistic 0.783 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 4389 5% A -D Critical Value 0.743 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4390 K -S Test Statistic 0.223 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 4391 5% K -S Critical Value 0.26 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4392 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level 4393 4394 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 4395 k hat (MLE) 1.459 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.121 4396 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00548 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00713 4397 nu hat (MLE) 32.09 nu star (bias corrected) 24.67 4398 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.008 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00755 4399 4400 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 4401 k hat (KM) 0.703 nu hat (KM) 18.27 4402 Approximate Chi Square Value (18.27, a) 9.588 Adjusted Chi Square Value (18.27, R) 8.704 4403 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0135 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0149 4404 4405 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 4406 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 4407 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 44081 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 4409 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 4410 Minimum 0.0022 Mean 0.00831 4411 Maximum 0.034 Median 0.0058 4412 SD 0.00853 CV 1.026 4413 k hat (MLE) 1.685 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.347 44141 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00493 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00617 4415 nu hat (MLE) 43.8 nu star (bias corrected) 35.02 4416 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00831 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00716 4417 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0301 4418 Approximate Chi Square Value (35.02, a) 22.48 Adjusted Chi Square Value (35.02, R) 21.06 4419 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0129 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0138 4420 A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 4421 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 4422 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.902 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 4423 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.85 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 44241 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.193 Lilliefors GOF Test 4425 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.267 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4426 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 4427 4428 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 4429 Mean in Original Scale 0.00689 Mean in Log Scale -5.509 4430 SD in Original Scale 0.00891 SD in Log Scale 1.054 4431 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0113 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0113 4432 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0135 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0197 4433 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0173 4434 4435 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 4436 KM Mean (logged) -5.363 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0117 4437 KM SD (logged) 0.809 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.534 4438 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.235 4439 4440 DU2 Statistics 4441 DU2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 4442 Mean in Original Scale 0.00692 Mean in Log Scale -5.47 4443 SD in Original Scale 0.00889 SD in Log Scale 0.987 4444 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0113 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0153 4445 DU2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 4446 4447 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 4448 Detected Data appear Approximate Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 4449 4450 Suggested UCL to Use 4451 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0117 95% GROS Adjusted Gamma UCL 0.0138 4452 95% Adjusted Gamma KM -UCL 0.0149 4453 4454 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 4455 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 4456 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 4457 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 4458 APPENDIX L Stantec ProUCL 5.0 Outputs SURFACE WATER PROUCL 95%UCLM Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1 UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non -Detects 2 3 User Selected Options 4 Date/Time of Computation 7/10/2015 1:36:35 AM 5 From File sw_input.xls 6 Full Precision OFF 7 Confidence Coefficient 95% 8 Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000 9 10 11 TKN 12 13 General Statistics 14 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 8 15 Number of Missing Observations 0 16 Minimum 0.34 Mean 0.466 17 Maximum 0.62 Median 0.465 18 SD 0.0975 Std. Error of Mean 0.0308 19 Coefficient of Variation 0.209 Skewness 0.161 20 21 Normal GOF Test 22 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.943 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 23 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 24 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.144 Lilliefors GOF Test 25 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 26 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 27 28 Assuming Normal Distribution 29 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 30 95% Student's -t UCL 0.523 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.518 31 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.523 32 33 Gamma GOF Test 34 A -D Test Statistic 0.296 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 35 5% A -D Critical Value 0.725 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 36 K -S Test Statistic 0.164 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 37 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 38 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 39 40 Gamma Statistics 41 k hat (MILE) 25.12 k star (bias corrected MILE) 17.65 42 Theta hat (MILE) 0.0186 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 0.0264 43 nu hat (MILE) 502.4 nu star (bias corrected) 353 44 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.466 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.111 45 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 310.5 46 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 303.5 47 48 Assuming Gamma Distribution 49 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 0.53 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.542 50 51 Lognormal GOF Test 52 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.939 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 53 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 54 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.165 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 55 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 56 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 57 58 Lognormal Statistics 59 Minimum of Logged Data -1.079 Mean of logged Data -0.784 60 Maximum of Logged Data -0.478 SD of logged Data 0.212 61 62 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 63 95% H -UCL 0.534 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.56 64 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.603 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.662 65 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.778 66 67 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 68 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 69 70 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 71 95% CLT UCL 0.517 95% Jackknife UCL 0.523 72 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.514 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 0.523 73 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.515 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.515 74 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.514 75 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.559 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.6 76 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.659 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.773 77 78 Suggested UCL to Use 79 95% Student's -t UCL 0.523 80 81 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 82 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 83 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 84 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 85 86 Toluene 87 88 General Statistics 89 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 90 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 91 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 92 93 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 94 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 95 96 The data set for variable Toluene was not processed! 97 98 99 Xylene, m & p- 100 101 General Statistics 102 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 103 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 104 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 A B C D E F G H I J K L 105 106 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 107 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 108 1091 The data set for variable Xylene, m & p- was not processed! 110 111 112 Xylenes, Total 113 114 General Statistics 115 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 116 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 117 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 118 119 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 120 1 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 121 122 The data set for variable Xylenes, Total was not processed! 123 124 125 126 Aluminum 127 128 General Statistics 129 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 130 Number of Missing Observations 0 131 Minimum 129 Mean 272 132 Maximum 710 Median 154.5 133 SD 211.8 Std. Error of Mean 66.99 134 Coefficient of Variation 0.779 Skewness 1.446 135 136 Normal GOF Test 137 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.703 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 138 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 139 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.38 Lilliefors GOF Test 140 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 141 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 142 143 Assuming Normal Distribution 144 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 145 95% Student's -t UCL 394.8 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 414.9 146 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 399.9 147 148 Gamma GOF Test 149 A -D Test Statistic 1.368 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 150 5% A -D Critical Value 0.734 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 151 K -S Test Statistic 0.37 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 152 5% K -S Critical Value 0.269 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 153 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 154 155 Gamma Statistics 156 k hat (MLE) 2.462 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.79 A B C D I E F G H I I J I K L 157 Theta hat (MLE) 110.5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 151.9 158 nu hat (MLE) 49.24 nu star (bias corrected) 35.8 159 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 272 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 203.3 1601 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 23.11 161 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 21.35 162 163 Assuming Gamma Distribution 164 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n-50)) 421.4 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 456.1 165 166 Lognormal GOF Test 167 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 168 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 169 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.342 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 170 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 171 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 172 173 Lognormal Statistics 174 Minimum of Logged Data 4.86 Mean of logged Data 5.389 175 Maximum of Logged Data 6.565 SD of logged Data 0.647 176 177 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 178 95% H -UCL 457.6 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 430 179 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 505.4 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 610 180 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 815.5 181 182 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 183 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 184 185 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 186 95% CLT UCL 382.2 95% Jackknife UCL 394.8 187 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 379.3 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 529.4 188 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 393.9 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 381.1 189 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 402.6 190 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 473 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 564 191 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 690.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 938.5 192 193 Suggested UCL to Use 194 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 564 195 196 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 197 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 198 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 199 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 200 201 202 Arsenic 203 204 General Statistics 205 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 206 Number of Missing Observations 0 207 Minimum 0.38 Mean 0.472 12081 Maximum 0.8 Median 0.425 A B C D E F G H I J I K L 209 SD 0.127 Std. Error of Mean 0.04 210 Coefficient of Variation 0.268 Skewness 2.255 211 2121 Normal GOF Test 213 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.726 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 214 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 215 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.234 Lilliefors GOF Test 216 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 217 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 218 219 Assuming Normal Distribution 220 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 221 95% Student's -t UCL 0.545 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.568 222 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.55 223 224 Gamma GOF Test 225 A -D Test Statistic 0.828 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 226 5% A -D Critical Value 0.725 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 227 K -S Test Statistic 0.229 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 228 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 229 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level 230 231 Gamma Statistics 232 k hat (MLE) 19.51 k star (bias corrected MLE) 13.72 233 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0242 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0344 234 nu hat (MLE) 390.2 nu star (bias corrected) 274.5 235 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.472 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.127 236 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 237.1 237 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 231.1 238 239 Assuming Gamma Distribution 240 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 0.546 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.561 241 242 Lognormal GOF Test 243 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.807 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 244 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 245 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.217 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 246 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 247 Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 248 249 Lognormal Statistics 250 Minimum of Logged Data -0.968 Mean of logged Data -0.777 251 Maximum of Logged Data -0.223 SD of logged Data 0.227 252 253 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 254 95% H -UCL 0.545 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.573 255 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.619 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.683 256 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.808 257 258 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 259 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 260 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 261 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 262 95% CLT UCL 0.538 95% Jackknife UCL 0.545 263 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.534 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 0.64 264 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.782 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.538 265 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.572 266 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.592 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.647 267 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.722 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.87 268 269 Suggested UCL to Use 270 95% Student's -t UCL 0.545 271 272 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 273 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 274 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 275 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 276 277 278 Barium 279 280 General Statistics 281 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 282 Number of Missing Observations 0 283 Minimum 42.6 Mean 45.64 284 Maximum 49.3 Median 45.25 285 SD 2.24 Std. Error of Mean 0.708 286 Coefficient of Variation 0.0491 Skewness 0.475 287 288 Normal GOF Test 289 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.947 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 290 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 291 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors GOF Test 292 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 293 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 294 295 Assuming Normal Distribution 296 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 297 95% Student's -t UCL 46.94 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 46.92 298 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 46.96 299 300 Gamma GOF Test 301 A -D Test Statistic 0.272 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 302 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 303 K -S Test Statistic 0.158 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 304 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 305 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 306 307 Gamma Statistics 308 k hat (MLE) 466.4 k star (bias corrected MLE) 326.6 309 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0979 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.14 310 nu hat (MLE) 9328 nu star (bias corrected) 6531 311 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 45.64 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.526 13121 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6344 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K L 313 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6312 314 315 Assuming Gamma Distribution 316 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 46.98 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 47.22 317 318 Lognormal GOF Test 319 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.952 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 320 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 321 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 322 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 323 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 324 325 Lognormal Statistics 326 Minimum of Logged Data 3.752 Mean of logged Data 3.82 327 Maximum of Logged Data 3.898 SD of logged Data 0.0487 328 329 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 330 95% H -UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 47.75 331 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 48.7 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 50.03 332 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 52.63 333 334 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 335 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 336 337 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 338 95% CLT UCL 46.8 95% Jackknife UCL 46.94 339 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 46.75 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 47.1 340 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 47.03 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 46.77 341 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 46.76 342 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 47.76 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 48.73 343 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 50.06 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 52.69 344 345 Suggested UCL to Use 346 95% Student's -t UCL 46.94 347 348 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 349 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 350 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 351 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 352 353 Cadmium 354 355 General Statistics 356 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 4 357 Number of Detects 7 Number of Non -Detects 3 358 Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 359 Minimum Detect 0.01 Minimum Non -Detect 0.01 360 Maximum Detect 0.016 Maximum Non -Detect 0.01 361 Variance Detects 4.2381 E-6 Percent Non -Detects 30% 362 Mean Detects 0.0117 SD Detects 0.00206 363 Median Detects 0.011 CV Detects 0.176 364 Skewness Detects 1.817 Kurtosis Detects 3.828 A B C D I E I F G H I J I K L 365 Mean of Logged Detects -4.459 SD of Logged Detects 0.161 366 367 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 3681 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.791 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 369 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 370 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.302 Lilliefors GOF Test 371 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 372 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 373 374 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 375 Mean 0.0112 Standard Error of Mean 6.0718E-4 376 SD 0.00178 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 377 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0123 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 378 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0122 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 379 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.013 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0138 380 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.015 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0172 381 382 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 383 A -D Test Statistic 0.599 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 384 5% A -D Critical Value 0.707 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 385 K -S Test Statistic 0.274 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 386 5% K -S Critical Value 0.311 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 387 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 388 389 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 390 k hat (MLE) 42.69 k star (bias corrected MLE) 24.49 391 Theta hat (MLE) 2.7439E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 4.7831 E-4 392 nu hat (MLE) 597.7 nu star (bias corrected) 342.9 393 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0117 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00237 394 395 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 396 k hat (KM) 39.7 nu hat (KM) 793.9 397 Approximate Chi Square Value (793.92, a) 729.5 Adjusted Chi Square Value (793.92, R) 718.8 398 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0122 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0124 399 400 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 401 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 402 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 403 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 4041 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 405 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0112 406 Maximum 0.016 Median 0.0105 407 SD 0.00187 CV 0.167 408 k hat (MLE) 46.45 k star (bias corrected MLE) 32.58 409 Theta hat (MLE) 2.4110E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 3.4372E-4 4101 nu hat (MLE) 929.1 nu star (bias corrected) 651.7 411 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0112 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00196 412 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 413 Approximate Chi Square Value (651.69, a) 593.5 Adjusted Chi Square Value (651.69, R) 583.8 414 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0123 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0125 415 14161 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only A B C I D I E F G H I I J K L 417 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.836 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 418 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 419 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.269 Lilliefors GOF Test 420 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 421 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 422 423 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 424 Mean in Original Scale 0.0105 Mean in Log Scale -4.578 425 SD in Original Scale 0.00255 SD in Log Scale 0.237 426 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.012 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0118 427 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.012 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0124 428 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0123 429 430 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 431 KM Mean (logged) -4.503 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0122 432 KM SD (logged) 0.142 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.833 433 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0484 434 435 DL/2 Statistics 436 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 437 Mean in Original Scale 0.0097 Mean in Log Scale -4.711 438 SD in Original Scale 0.00365 SD in Log Scale 0.426 439 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0118 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0133 440 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 441 442 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 443 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 444 445 Suggested UCL to Use 446 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0123 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 447 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 448 449 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 450 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 451 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 452 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 453 454 455 Calcium 456 457 General Statistics 458 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 459 Number of Missing Observations 0 460 Minimum 75 Mean 87.52 461 Maximum 90.9 Median 88.65 462 SD 4.603 Std. Error of Mean 1.456 463 Coefficient of Variation 0.0526 Skewness -2.664 464 465 Normal GOF Test 466 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.65 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 467 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 468 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.338 Lilliefors GOF Test A B C I D I E IF G H I I I J I K L 469 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 470 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 471 4721 Assuming Normal Distribution 473 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 474 95% Student's-t UCL 90.19 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 88.6 475 95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 89.98 476 477 Gamma GOF Test 478 A-D Test Statistic 1.497 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test 479 5% A-D Critical Value 0.724 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 480 K-S Test Statistic 0.344 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 481 5% K-S Critical Value 0.266 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 482 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 483 484 Gamma Statistics 485 k hat (MILE) 370.6 k star (bias corrected MILE) 259.5 486 Theta hat (MILE) 0.236 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 0.337 487 nu hat (MILE) 7412 nu star (bias corrected) 5190 488 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 87.52 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 5.433 489 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 5023 490 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 4995 491 492 Assuming Gamma Distribution 493 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 90.42 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 90.94 494 495 Lognormal GOF Test 496 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.629 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 497 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 498 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.351 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 499 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 500 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 501 502 Lognormal Statistics 503 Minimum of Logged Data 4.317 Mean of logged Data 4.471 504 Maximum of Logged Data 4.51 SD of logged Data 0.0559 505 506 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 507 95% H-UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 92.17 508 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 94.27 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 97.19 509 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 102.9 510 511 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 512 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 513 514 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 515 95% CLT UCL 89.91 95% Jackknife UCL 90.19 516 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 89.81 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 89.26 517 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 89.05 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 89.33 518 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 89.05 519 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 91.89 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 93.86 15201 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 96.61 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 102 A B C D E F G H I J K L 521 522 Suggested UCL to Use 523 95% Student's -t UCL 90.19 or 95% Modified -t UCL 89.98 524 5251 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 526 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 527 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 528 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 529 530 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 531 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 532 533 534 Copper 535 536 General Statistics 537 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 538 Number of Missing Observations 0 539 Minimum 0.99 Mean 1.435 540 Maximum 1.85 Median 1.405 541 SD 0.286 Std. Error of Mean 0.0905 542 Coefficient of Variation 0.199 Skewness -0.0265 543 544 Normal GOF Test 545 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.966 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 546 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 547 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.141 Lilliefors GOF Test 548 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 549 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 550 551 Assuming Normal Distribution 552 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 553 95% Student's -t UCL 1.601 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 1.583 554 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 1.601 555 556 Gamma GOF Test 557 A -D Test Statistic 0.205 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 558 5% A -D Critical Value 0.725 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 559 K -S Test Statistic 0.16 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 560 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 561 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 562 563 Gamma Statistics 564 k hat (MLE) 27.1 k star (bias corrected MLE) 19.04 565 Theta hat (MLE) 0.053 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0754 566 nu hat (MLE) 542 nu star (bias corrected) 380.7 567 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.435 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.329 568 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 336.5 569 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 329.2 570 571 Assuming Gamma Distribution 572 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 1.624 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 1.659 A B C D E F G H I J K L 573 574 Lognormal GOF Test 575 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.963 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 576 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 5771 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.152 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 578 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 579 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 580 581 Lognormal Statistics 582 Minimum of Logged Data -0.0101 Mean of logged Data 0.343 583 Maximum of Logged Data 0.615 SD of logged Data 0.205 584 585 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 586 95% H -UCL 1.637 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.716 587 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1.843 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.019 588 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.366 589 590 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 591 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 592 593 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 594 95% CLT UCL 1.584 95% Jackknife UCL 1.601 595 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 1.574 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 1.603 596 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 1.566 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.576 597 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.578 598 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.706 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1.829 599 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.335 600 601 Suggested UCL to Use 602 95% Student's -t UCL1.601 603 604 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 605 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 606 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 607 1 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 608 609 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 610 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 611 612 613 Iron 614 615 General Statistics 616 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 617 Number of Missing Observations 0 618 Minimum 298 Mean 431.4 619 Maximum 762 Median 324 620 SD 186.4 Std. Error of Mean 58.96 621 Coefficient of Variation 0.432 Skewness 1.083 622 623 Normal GOF Test 16241 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.705 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 625 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 626 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.349 Lilliefors GOF Test 627 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 6281 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 629 630 Assuming Normal Distribution 631 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 632 95% Student's -t UCL 539.5 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 549.9 633 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 542.8 634 635 Gamma GOF Test 636 A -D Test Statistic 1.462 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 637 5% A -D Critical Value 0.728 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 638 K -S Test Statistic 0.332 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 639 5% K -S Critical Value 0.267 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 640 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 641 642 Gamma Statistics 643 k hat (MILE) 7.032 k star (bias corrected MILE) 4.989 644 Theta hat (MILE) 61.34 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 86.46 645 nu hat (MILE) 140.6 nu star (bias corrected) 99.79 646 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 431.4 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 193.1 647 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 77.74 648 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 74.37 649 650 Assuming Gamma Distribution 651 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 553.7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 578.9 652 653 Lognormal GOF Test 654 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.724 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 655 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 656 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.31 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 657 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 658 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 659 660 Lognormal Statistics 661 Minimum of Logged Data 5.697 Mean of logged Data 5.994 662 Maximum of Logged Data 6.636 SD of logged Data 0.386 663 664 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 665 95% H -UCL 564.2 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 587.5 666 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 659.5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 759.3 667 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 955.4 668 669 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 6701 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 671 672 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 673 95% CLT UCL 528.4 95% Jackknife UCL 539.5 674 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 524 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 569 675 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 494.1 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 522.1 676 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 542.7 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K L 677 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 608.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 688.4 678 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 799.6 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1018 679 6801 Suggested UCL to Use 681 95% Student's -t UCL 539.5 or 95% Modified -t UCL 542.8 682 683 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 684 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 685 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 686 1 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 687 688 Lead 689 690 General Statistics 691 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 692 Number of Detects 8 Number of Non -Detects 2 693 Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 694 Minimum Detect 0.24 Minimum Non -Detect 0.2 695 Maximum Detect 0.57 Maximum Non -Detect 0.2 696 Variance Detects 0.0214 Percent Non -Detects 20% 697 Mean Detects 0.37 SD Detects 0.146 698 Median Detects 0.29 CV Detects 0.396 699 Skewness Detects 0.643 Kurtosis Detects -1.957 700 Mean of Logged Detects -1.06 SD of Logged Detects 0.38 701 702 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 703 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.779 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 704 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 705 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.284 Lilliefors GOF Test 706 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 707 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 708 709 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 7101 Mean 0.336 Standard Error of Mean 0.0474 711 SD 0.14 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.408 712 95% KM (t) UCL 0.423 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.407 713 95% KM (z) UCL 0.414 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.44 714 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.478 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.542 715 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.632 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.807 716 7171 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 718 A -D Test Statistic 0.847 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 719 5% A -D Critical Value 0.717 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 720 K -S Test Statistic 0.265 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 721 5% K -S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 7221 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level 723 724 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 725 k hat (MLE) 7.825 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.974 726 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0473 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0744 727 nu hat (MLE) 125.2 nu star (bias corrected) 79.58 17281 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.37 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.166 A B C D E F G H I J K L 729 730 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 731 k hat (KM) 5.753 nu hat (KM) 115.1 7321 Approximate Chi Square Value (115.06, a) 91.29 Adjusted Chi Square Value (115.06, R) 87.62 733 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.423 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.441 734 735 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 736 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 737 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 738 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 739 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 740 Minimum 0.0597 Mean 0.313 741 Maximum 0.57 Median 0.265 742 SD 0.176 CV 0.563 743 k hat (MLE) 2.83 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.048 744 Theta hat (MLE) 0.111 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.153 745 nu hat (MLE) 56.61 nu star (bias corrected) 40.96 746 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.313 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.219 747 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 748 Approximate Chi Square Value (40.96, a) 27.29 Adjusted Chi Square Value (40.96, R) 25.37 749 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.47 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.506 750 751 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 752 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.802 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 753 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 754 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.245 Lilliefors GOF Test 755 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 756 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 757 758 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 759 Mean in Original Scale 0.324 Mean in Log Scale -1.238 760 SD in Original Scale 0.161 SD in Log Scale 0.507 761 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.418 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.408 762 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.411 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.435 763 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.481 764 765 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 7661 KM Mean (logged) -1.169 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.437 767 KM SD (logged) 0.387 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.073 768 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.131 769 770 DL/2 Statistics 771 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 7721 Mean in Original Scale 0.316 Mean in Log Scale -1.308 773 SD in Original Scale 0.172 SD in Log Scale 0.622 774 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.416 95% H -Stat UCL 0.54 775 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 776 777 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 7781 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 779 780 Suggested UCL to Use A B C D I E F G H I I J I K L 781 95% KM (t) UCL 0.423 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.407 782 783 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 7841 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 785 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 786 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 787 788 789 Magnesium 790 791 General Statistics 792 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 793 Number of Missing Observations 0 794 Minimum 14.5 Mean 16.66 795 Maximum 18 Median 16.7 796 SD 0.929 Std. Error of Mean 0.294 797 Coefficient of Variation 0.0558 Skewness -1.225 798 799 Normal GOF Test 800 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.893 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 801 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 802 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.249 Lilliefors GOF Test 803 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 804 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 805 806 Assuming Normal Distribution 807 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 808 95% Student's -t UCL 17.2 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 17.02 809 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 17.18 810 811 Gamma GOF Test 812 A -D Test Statistic 0.538 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 813 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 814 K -S Test Statistic 0.25 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 815 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 816 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 817 818 Gamma Statistics 819 k hat (MILE) 343 k star (bias corrected MILE) 240.1 820 Theta hat (MILE) 0.0486 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 0.0694 821 nu hat (MILE) 6859 nu star (bias corrected) 4803 822 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 16.66 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 1.075 823 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 4643 824 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 4615 825 826 Assuming Gamma Distribution 827 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 17.23 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 17.34 828 829 Lognormal GOF Test 830 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.871 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 831 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 832 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.262 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test A B C D E F G H I J K L 833 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 834 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 835 8361 Lognormal Statistics 837 Minimum of Logged Data 2.674 Mean of logged Data 2.812 838 Maximum of Logged Data 2.89 SD of logged Data 0.0576 839 840 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 841 95% H -UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.57 842 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.98 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 18.55 843 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 19.68 844 845 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 846 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 847 848 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 849 95% CLT UCL 17.14 95% Jackknife UCL 17.2 850 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 17.12 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 17.09 851 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 17.08 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 17.1 852 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 17.03 853 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.54 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.94 854 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 18.49 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 19.58 855 856 Suggested UCL to Use 857 95% Student's -t UCL 17.2 858 859 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 860 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 861 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 862 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 863 864 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 865 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 866 867 868 Manganese 869 870 General Statistics 871 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 872 Number of Missing Observations 0 873 Minimum 43.2 Mean 50.98 874 Maximum 72.4 Median 45.2 875 SD 10.45 Std. Error of Mean 3.305 876 Coefficient of Variation 0.205 Skewness 1.296 877 878 Normal GOF Test 879 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.739 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 880 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 881 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.334 Lilliefors GOF Test 882 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 883 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 884 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 885 Assuming Normal Distribution 886 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 887 95% Student's -t UCL 57.04 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 57.86 888 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 57.26 889 890 Gamma GOF Test 891 A -D Test Statistic 1.288 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 892 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 893 K -S Test Statistic 0.329 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 894 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 895 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 896 897 Gamma Statistics 898 k hat (MLE) 29.64 k star (bias corrected MLE) 20.82 899 Theta hat (MLE) 1.72 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 2.449 900 nu hat (MLE) 592.9 nu star (bias corrected) 416.3 901 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 50.98 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 11.17 902 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 370 903 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 362.4 904 905 Assuming Gamma Distribution 906 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 57.36 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 58.56 907 908 Lognormal GOF Test 909 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.753 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 910 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 911 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.316 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 912 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 913 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 914 915 Lognormal Statistics 916 Minimum of Logged Data 3.766 Mean of logged Data 3.914 917 Maximum of Logged Data 4.282 SD of logged Data 0.189 918 919 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 920 95% H -UCL 57.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 60.08 921 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 64.23 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 69.98 922 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 81.28 923 924 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 925 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 926 927 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 928 95% CLT UCL 56.42 95% Jackknife UCL 57.04 929 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 56.16 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 59.95 930 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 54.98 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 56.31 931 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 57.46 932 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 60.89 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 65.39 933 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 71.62 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 83.86 934 935 Suggested UCL to Use 936 95% Student's -t UCL 57.04 or 95% Modified -t UCL 57.26 A B C D E F G H I J K L 937 938 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 939 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 940 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 941 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 942 943 Nickel 944 945 General Statistics 946 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 4 947 Number of Detects 3 Number of Non -Detects 7 948 Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 949 Minimum Detect 1.1 Minimum Non -Detect 1 950 Maximum Detect 1.4 Maximum Non -Detect 1 951 Variance Detects 0.0233 Percent Non -Detects 70% 9521 Mean Detects 1.267 SD Detects 0.153 953 Median Detects 1.3 CV Detects 0.121 954 Skewness Detects -0.935 Kurtosis Detects N/A 955 Mean of Logged Detects 0.231 SD of Logged Detects 0.124 956 957 Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values. 9581 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 959 960 961 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 962 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.964 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 963 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 9641 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.253 Lilliefors GOF Test 965 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 966 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 967 968 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 969 Mean 1.08 Standard Error of Mean 0.0542 9701 SD 0.14 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 971 95% KM (t) UCL 1.179 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 972 95% KM (z) UCL 1.169 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 973 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.243 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.316 974 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.419 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.619 975 9761 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 977 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 978 979 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 980 k hat (MLE) 100 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 981 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0127 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 9821 nu hat (MLE) 600.2 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 983 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 984 985 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 986 k hat (KM) 59.51 nu hat (KM) 1190 987 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 19881 Approximate Chi Square Value (N/A, a) 1111 Adjusted Chi Square Value (N/A, R) 1098 A B I C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 989 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 1.157 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 1.171 990 991 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 9921 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.953 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 993 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 994 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.266 Lilliefors GOF Test 995 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 996 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 997 998 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 999 Mean in Original Scale 0.914 Mean in Log Scale -0.132 1000 SD in Original Scale 0.28 SD in Log Scale 0.303 1001 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.076 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.058 1002 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.067 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.104 1003 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 1.121 1004 1005 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1006 KM Mean (logged) 0.0694 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 1.161 1007 KM SD (logged) 0.12 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.816 1008 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0463 1009 1010 DL/2 Statistics 1011 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1012 Mean in Original Scale 0.73 Mean in Log Scale -0.416 1013 SD in Original Scale 0.377 SD in Log Scale 0.45 1014 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.949 95% H -Stat UCL 1.009 1015 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1016 1017 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1018 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1019 1020 Suggested UCL to Use 1021 95% KM (t) UCL 1.179 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 1022 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 1023 1024 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1025 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1026 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1027 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1028 1029 1030 Potassium 1031 1032 General Statistics 1033 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 1034 Number of Missing Observations 0 1035 Minimum 2.35 Mean 2.487 1036 Maximum 2.77 Median 2.47 1037 SD 0.123 Std. Error of Mean 0.0388 1038 Coefficient of Variation 0.0493 Skewness 1.366 1039 110401 Normal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I J K L 1041 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.894 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1042 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1043 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.158 Lilliefors GOF Test 1044 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1045 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1046 1047 Assuming Normal Distribution 1048 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1049 95% Student's -t UCL 2.558 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 2.569 1050 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 2.561 1051 1052 Gamma GOF Test 1053 A -D Test Statistic 0.371 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1054 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1055 K -S Test Statistic 0.149 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1056 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1057 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1058 1059 Gamma Statistics 1060 k hat (MLE) 472 k star (bias corrected MLE) 330.5 1061 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00527 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00753 1062 nu hat (MLE) 9441 nu star (bias corrected) 6610 1063 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 2.487 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.137 1064 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6422 1065 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6390 1066 1067 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1068 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 2.56 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 2.573 1069 1070 Lognormal GOF Test 1071 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.909 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1072 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1073 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.148 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1074 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1075 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1076 1077 Lognormal Statistics 1078 Minimum of Logged Data 0.854 Mean of logged Data 0.91 1079 Maximum of Logged Data 1.019 SD of logged Data 0.0481 1080 1081 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1082 95% H -UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.601 1083 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.652 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.723 1084 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 2.864 1085 1086 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1087 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1088 1089 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1090 95% CLT UCL 2.551 95% Jackknife UCL 2.558 1091 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 2.548 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 2.592 1092 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 2.834 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 2.55 A B C I D I E F G H I J K L 1093 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 2.56 1094 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.603 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.656 1095 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.729 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 2.873 1096 1097 Suggested UCL to Use 1098 95% Student's -t UCL 2.558 1099 1100 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1101 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1102 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1103 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1104 1105 Selenium 1106 1107 General Statistics 1108 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 7 1109 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 1 1110 Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1111 Minimum Detect 0.15 Minimum Non -Detect 0.1 1112 Maximum Detect 0.22 Maximum Non -Detect 0.1 1113 Variance Detects 6.8611 E-4 Percent Non -Detects 10% 1114 Mean Detects 0.179 SD Detects 0.0262 1115 Median Detects 0.18 CV Detects 0.146 1116 Skewness Detects 0.423 Kurtosis Detects -1.362 1117 Mean of Logged Detects -1.73 SD of Logged Detects 0.145 1118 1119 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1120 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.905 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1121 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1122 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.209 Lilliefors GOF Test 1123 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1124 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1125 1126 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1127 Mean 0.171 Standard Error of Mean 0.0112 1128 SD 0.0333 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.187 1129 95% KM (t) UCL 0.191 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.189 1130 95% KM (z) UCL 0.189 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.189 1131 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.205 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.22 1132 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.241 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.282 1133 1134 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1135 A -D Test Statistic 0.406 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1136 5% A -D Critical Value 0.72 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1137 K -S Test Statistic 0.22 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1138 5% K -S Critical Value 0.279 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1139 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1140 1141 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1142 k hat (MLE) 53.55 k star (bias corrected MLE) 35.77 1143 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00334 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.005 111441 nu hat (MLE) 963.8 nu star (bias corrected) 643.9 A B C I D I E F G H I J I K L 1145 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.179 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0299 1146 1147 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 11481 k hat (KM) 26.37 nu hat (KM) 527.3 1149 Approximate Chi Square Value (527.34, a) 475.1 Adjusted Chi Square Value (527.34, R) 466.4 1150 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.19 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.193 1151 1152 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1153 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1154 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1155 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1156 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1157 Minimum 0.119 Mean 0.173 1158 Maximum 0.22 Median 0.17 1159 SD 0.0311 CV 0.18 1160 k hat (MLE) 33.37 k star (bias corrected MLE) 23.42 1161 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00518 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00738 1162 nu hat (MLE) 667.3 nu star (bias corrected) 468.5 1163 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.173 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0357 1164 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 1165 Approximate Chi Square Value (468.47, a) 419.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (468.47, R) 411.2 1166 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.193 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.197 1167 1168 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1169 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.909 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1170 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1171 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.205 Lilliefors GOF Test 1172 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1173 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1174 1175 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1176 Mean in Original Scale 0.173 Mean in Log Scale -1.766 1177 SD in Original Scale 0.0301 SD in Log Scale 0.177 1178 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.191 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.188 1179 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.188 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.192 1180 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.194 1181 1182 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1183 KM Mean (logged) -1.788 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.196 1184 KM SD (logged) 0.215 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.894 1185 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0721 1186 1187 DL/2 Statistics 1188 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1189 Mean in Original Scale 0.166 Mean in Log Scale -1.857 1190 SD in Original Scale 0.0477 SD in Log Scale 0.423 1191 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.194 95% H -Stat UCL 0.23 1192 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1193 1194 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1195 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1196 A B C D E F I G H I J K L 1197 Suggested UCL to Use 1198 95% KM (t) UCL 0.191 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.189 1199 12001 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1201 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1202 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1203 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1204 1205 1206 Sodium 1207 1208 General Statistics 1209 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 1210 Number of Missing Observations 0 1211 Minimum 14.6 Mean 37.54 1212 Maximum 58.7 Median 40.1 1213 SD 13.74 Std. Error of Mean 4.346 1214 Coefficient of Variation 0.366 Skewness -0.154 1215 1216 Normal GOF Test 1217 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.97 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1218 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1219 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.168 Lilliefors GOF Test 1220 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1221 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1222 1223 Assuming Normal Distribution 1224 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1225 95% Student's -t UCL 45.51 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 44.46 1226 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 45.47 1227 1228 Gamma GOF Test 1229 A -D Test Statistic 0.307 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1230 5% A -D Critical Value 0.728 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1231 K -S Test Statistic 0.214 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1232 5% K -S Critical Value 0.267 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1233 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1234 1235 Gamma Statistics 1236 k hat (MLE) 7.08 k star (bias corrected MLE) 5.022 1237 Theta hat (MLE) 5.303 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 7.474 1238 nu hat (MLE) 141.6 nu star (bias corrected) 100.4 1239 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 37.54 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 16.75 1240 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 78.33 1241 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 74.94 1242 1243 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1244 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 48.14 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 50.32 1245 1246 Lognormal GOF Test 1247 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.926 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1248 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E F G H I I I J I K L 1249 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.224 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1250 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1251 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1252 1253 Lognormal Statistics 1254 Minimum of Logged Data 2.681 Mean of logged Data 3.553 1255 Maximum of Logged Data 4.072 SD of logged Data 0.423 1256 1257 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1258 95% H -UCL 51.48 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 53.21 1259 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 60.18 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 69.85 1260 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 88.85 1261 1262 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1263 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1264 1265 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1266 95% CLT UCL 44.69 95% Jackknife UCL 45.51 1267 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 44.29 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 45.07 1268 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 44.2 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 44.22 1269 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 44.2 1270 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 50.58 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 56.48 1271 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 64.68 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 80.78 1272 1273 Suggested UCL to Use 1274 95% Student's -t UCL 45.51 1275 1276 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1277 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1278 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1279 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1280 1281 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 1282 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 1283 1284 1285 Strontium 1286 1287 General Statistics 1288 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 1289 Number of Missing Observations 0 1290 Minimum 280 Mean 312.7 1291 Maximum 329 Median 316 1292 SD 14 Std. Error of Mean 4.427 1293 Coefficient of Variation 0.0448 Skewness -1.45 1294 1295 Normal GOF Test 1296 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.884 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1297 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1298 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.174 Lilliefors GOF Test 1299 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 113001 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 1301 1302 Assuming Normal Distribution 1303 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1304 95% Student's -t UCL 320.8 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 317.8 1305 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 320.5 1306 1307 Gamma GOF Test 1308 A -D Test Statistic 0.499 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1309 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1310 K -S Test Statistic 0.183 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1311 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1312 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1313 1314 Gamma Statistics 1315 k hat (MLE) 533.9 k star (bias corrected MLE) 373.8 1316 Theta hat (MLE) 0.586 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.837 1317 nu hat (MLE) 10678 nu star (bias corrected) 7476 1318 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 312.7 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 16.17 1319 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 7276 1320 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7241 1321 1322 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1323 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 321.3 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 322.8 1324 1325 Lognormal GOF Test 1326 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.868 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1327 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1328 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.177 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1329 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1330 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1331 1332 Lognormal Statistics 1333 Minimum of Logged Data 5.635 Mean of logged Data 5.744 1334 Maximum of Logged Data 5.796 SD of logged Data 0.0461 1335 1336 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1337 95% H -UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 326.4 1338 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 332.6 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 341.2 1339 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 358 1340 1341 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1342 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1343 1344 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1345 95% CLT UCL 320 95% Jackknife UCL 320.8 1346 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 319.4 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 319 1347 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 318.4 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 319.4 1348 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 318.3 1349 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 326 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 332 1350 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 340.3 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 356.8 1351 113521 Suggested UCL to Use A B C D I E F G H I J K L 1353 95% Student's -t UCL 320.8 1354 1355 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 13561 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1357 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1358 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1359 1360 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 1361 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 1362 1363 1364 Sulfur 1365 1366 General Statistics 1367 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 1368 Number of Missing Observations 0 1369 Minimum 9 Mean 11.28 1370 Maximum 14.6 Median 11.3 1371 SD 1.916 Std. Error of Mean 0.606 1372 Coefficient of Variation 0.17 Skewness 0.763 1373 1374 Normal GOF Test 1375 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.889 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1376 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1377 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.254 Lilliefors GOF Test 1378 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1379 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1380 1381 Assuming Normal Distribution 1382 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1383 95% Student's -t UCL 12.39 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 12.43 1384 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 12.42 1385 1386 Gamma GOF Test 1387 A -D Test Statistic 0.45 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1388 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1389 K -S Test Statistic 0.23 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1390 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1391 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1392 1393 Gamma Statistics 1394 k hat (MLE) 40.34 k star (bias corrected MLE) 28.31 1395 Theta hat (MLE) 0.28 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.398 1396 nu hat (MLE) 806.9 nu star (bias corrected) 566.1 1397 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 11.28 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.12 1398 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 511.9 1399 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 503 1400 1401 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1402 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 12.47 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 12.7 1403 114041 Lognormal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 1405 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.914 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1406 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1407 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.224 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1408 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1409 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1410 1411 Lognormal Statistics 1412 Minimum of Logged Data 2.197 Mean of logged Data 2.411 1413 Maximum of Logged Data 2.681 SD of logged Data 0.165 1414 1415 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1416 95% H -UCL 12.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.04 1417 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 13.84 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 14.95 1418 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 17.13 1419 1420 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1421 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1422 1423 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1424 95% CLT UCL 12.28 95% Jackknife UCL 12.39 1425 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 12.23 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 12.79 1426 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 13.53 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 12.27 1427 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 12.35 1428 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.1 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 13.92 1429 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 15.06 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17.31 1430 1431 Suggested UCL to Use 1432 95% Student's -t UCL 12.39 1433 1434 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1435 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1436 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1437 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1438 1439 Titanium 1440 1441 General Statistics 1442 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 1443 Number of Detects 8 Number of Non -Detects 2 1444 Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1445 Minimum Detect 5.2 Minimum Non -Detect 5 1446 Maximum Detect 42.7 Maximum Non -Detect 5 1447 Variance Detects 187 Percent Non -Detects 20% 1448 Mean Detects 15.66 SD Detects 13.68 1449 Median Detects 8.7 CV Detects 0.873 1450 Skewness Detects 1.277 Kurtosis Detects 0.88 1451 Mean of Logged Detects 2.435 SD of Logged Detects 0.836 1452 1453 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1454 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.803 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1455 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1456 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.258 Lilliefors GOF Test A B C I D I E I F G I H I I I J I K I L 1457 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1458 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1459 14601 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1461 Mean 13.53 Standard Error of Mean 4.128 1462 SD 12.21 95% KM (BCA) UCL 20.4 1463 95% KM (t) UCL 21.1 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 20.45 1464 95% KM (z) UCL 20.32 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 25.6 1465 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 25.91 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 31.52 1466 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 39.31 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 54.6 1467 1468 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1469 A -D Test Statistic 0.653 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1470 5% A -D Critical Value 0.726 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1471 K -S Test Statistic 0.288 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1472 5% K -S Critical Value 0.298 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1473 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1474 1475 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1476 k hat (MLE) 1.728 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.163 1477 Theta hat (MLE) 9.065 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 13.46 1478 nu hat (MLE) 27.65 nu star (bias corrected) 18.61 1479 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 15.66 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 14.52 1480 1481 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1482 k hat (KM) 1.228 nu hat (KM) 24.55 1483 Approximate Chi Square Value (24.55, a) 14.27 Adjusted Chi Square Value (24.55, R) 12.93 1484 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 23.28 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 25.7 1485 1486 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1487 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1488 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1489 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1490 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1491 Minimum 0.01 Mean 12.53 1492 Maximum 42.7 Median 5.9 1493 SD 13.75 CV 1.097 1494 k hat (MLE) 0.433 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.37 1495 Theta hat (MLE) 28.96 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 33.91 1496 nu hat (MLE) 8.655 nu star (bias corrected) 7.392 1497 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 12.53 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 20.61 1498 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0267 1499 Approximate Chi Square Value (7.39, a) 2.388 Adjusted Chi Square Value (7.39, (3) 1.924 1500 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 38.79 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 48.14 1501 1502 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1503 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.848 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1504 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1505 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.273 Lilliefors GOF Test 1506 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1507 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1508 A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 1509 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1510 Mean in Original Scale 12.84 Mean in Log Scale 2.032 1511 SD in Original Scale 13.45 SD in Log Scale 1.131 1512 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 20.64 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 19.69 1513 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 20.97 95% Bootstrap t UCL 25.71 1514 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 51.64 1515 1516 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1517 KM Mean (logged) 2.27 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 25.92 1518 KM SD (logged) 0.773 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.661 1519 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.261 1520 1521 DL/2 Statistics 1522 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1523 Mean in Original Scale 13.03 Mean in Log Scale 2.131 1524 SD in Original Scale 13.28 SD in Log Scale 0.976 1525 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 20.73 95% H -Stat UCL 36.68 1526 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1527 1528 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1529 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1530 1531 Suggested UCL to Use 1532 95% KM (t) UCL 21.1 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 20.45 1533 1534 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1535 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1536 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1537 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1538 1539 1540 Uranium 1541 1542 General Statistics 1543 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 7 1544 Number of Missing Observations 0 1545 Minimum 0.73 Mean 0.779 1546 Maximum 0.84 Median 0.78 1547 SD 0.0288 Std. Error of Mean 0.00912 1548 Coefficient of Variation 0.037 Skewness 0.61 1549 1550 Normal GOF Test 1551 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.941 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1552 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1553 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.186 Lilliefors GOF Test 1554 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1555 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1556 1557 Assuming Normal Distribution 1558 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1559 95% Student's -t UCL 0.796 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.796 1560 1 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.796 A B C D E F G H I J K L 1561 1562 Gamma GOF Test 1563 A -D Test Statistic 0.357 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1564 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1565 K -S Test Statistic 0.181 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1566 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1567 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1568 1569 Gamma Statistics 1570 k hat (MLE) 818.5 k star (bias corrected MLE) 573 1571 Theta hat (MLE) 9.5178E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00136 1572 nu hat (MLE) 16369 nu star (bias corrected) 11460 1573 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.779 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0325 1574 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 11212 1575 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 11169 1576 1577 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1578 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 0.796 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.799 1579 1580 Lognormal GOF Test 1581 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.946 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1582 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1583 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.179 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1584 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1585 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1586 1587 Lognormal Statistics 1588 Minimum of Logged Data -0.315 Mean of logged Data -0.25 1589 Maximum of Logged Data -0.174 SD of logged Data 0.0368 1590 1591 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1592 95% H -UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.806 1593 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.818 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.836 1594 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.869 1595 1596 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1597 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1598 1599 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1600 95% CLT UCL 0.794 95% Jackknife UCL 0.796 1601 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.794 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 0.798 1602 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.803 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.794 1603 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.796 1604 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.806 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.819 1605 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.836 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.87 1606 1607 Suggested UCL to Use 1608 95% Student's -t UCL 0.796 1609 1610 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1611 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 116121 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 1613 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1614 1615 Zinc 1616 1617 General Statistics 1618 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 5 1619 Number of Detects 4 Number of Non -Detects 6 1620 Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1621 Minimum Detect 18.5 Minimum Non -Detect 5 1622 Maximum Detect 46.2 Maximum Non -Detect 5 1623 Variance Detects 132.4 Percent Non -Detects 60% 1624 Mean Detects 30.68 SD Detects 11.51 1625 Median Detects 29 CV Detects 0.375 1626 Skewness Detects 0.838 Kurtosis Detects 1.729 1627 Mean of Logged Detects 3.371 SD of Logged Detects 0.375 1628 1629 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1630 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.948 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1631 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1632 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.27 Lilliefors GOF Test 1633 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1634 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1635 1636 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1637 Mean 15.27 Standard Error of Mean 5.137 1638 SD 14.07 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 1639 95% KM (t) UCL 24.69 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 1640 95% KM (z) UCL 23.72 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 1641 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 30.68 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 37.66 1642 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 47.35 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 66.39 1643 1644 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1645 A -D Test Statistic 0.261 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1646 5% A -D Critical Value 0.657 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1647 K -S Test Statistic 0.231 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1648 5% K -S Critical Value 0.395 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1649 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1650 1651 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1652 k hat (MLE) 9.692 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.59 1653 Theta hat (MLE) 3.165 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 11.84 1654 nu hat (MLE) 77.54 nu star (bias corrected) 20.72 1655 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 30.68 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 19.06 1656 1657 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1658 k hat (KM) 1.178 nu hat (KM) 23.56 1659 Approximate Chi Square Value (23.56, a) 13.51 Adjusted Chi Square Value (23.56, R) 12.21 1660 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 26.62 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 29.46 1661 1662 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1663 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1664 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 1665 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1666 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1667 Minimum 0.01 Mean 13.51 16681 Maximum 46.2 Median 6.183 1669 SD 16.41 CV 1.215 1670 k hat (MLE) 0.257 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.247 1671 Theta hat (MLE) 52.54 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 54.77 1672 nu hat (MLE) 5.143 nu star (bias corrected) 4.933 1673 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 13.51 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 27.2 1674 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0267 1675 Approximate Chi Square Value (4.93, a) 1.122 Adjusted Chi Square Value (4.93, (3) 0.841 1676 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 59.43 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A 1677 1678 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1679 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.976 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1680 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1681 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.214 Lilliefors GOF Test 1682 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1683 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1684 1685 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1686 Mean in Original Scale 17.27 Mean in Log Scale 2.57 1687 SD in Original Scale 13.58 SD in Log Scale 0.802 1688 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 25.14 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 24.5 1689 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 25.82 95% Bootstrap t UCL 28.37 1690 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 37.2 1691 1692 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1693 KM Mean (logged) 2.314 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 35.09 1694 KM SD (logged) 0.887 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.876 1695 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.324 1696 1697 DL/2 Statistics 1698 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1699 Mean in Original Scale 13.77 Mean in Log Scale 1.898 1700 SD in Original Scale 15.99 SD in Log Scale 1.286 1701 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 23.04 95% H -Stat UCL 75.11 1702 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1703 1704 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1705 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1706 1707 Suggested UCL to Use 1708 95% KM (t) UCL 24.69 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 1709 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 1710 1711 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1712 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1713 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1714 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1715 117161Benzo(a)anthracene A B C D E F G H I J K L 1717 1718 General Statistics 1719 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 17201 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 1721 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1722 1723 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 1724 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 1725 1726 The data set for variable Benzo(a)anthracene was not processed! 1727 1728 1729 Benzo(a)pyrene 1730 1731 General Statistics 1732 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 1733 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 1734 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1735 1736 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 1737 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 1738 1739 The data set for variable Benzo(a)pyrene was not processed! 1740 1741 1742 Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene 1743 1744 General Statistics 1745 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 1746 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 1747 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1748 1749 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 1750 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 1751 1752 The data set for variable Benzo(b/j)fluoranthene was not processed! 1753 1754 1755 Chrysene 1756 1757 General Statistics 1758 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 1759 Number of Detects 1 Number of Non -Detects 9 1760 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1761 1762 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! 1763 It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). 1764 1765 The data set for variable Chrysene was not processed! 1766 1767 1768 Fluoranthene 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 Methylnaphthalene, 2- 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 Naphthalene 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 Pyrene 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 1 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Observations 2 Number of Non -Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). The data set for variable Fluoranthene was not processed! General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 1 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Observations 2 Number of Non -Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). The data set for variable Methylnaphthalene, 2- was not processed! General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 1 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Observations 2 Number of Non -Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). The data set for variable Naphthalene was not processed! General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 1 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Observations 2 Number of Non -Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). The data set for variable Pyrene was not processed! APPENDIX L Stantec ProUCL 5.0 Outputs FISH TISSUE PROUCL 95%UCLM Design with community in mind Stantec Consulting Ltd. A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1 UCL Statistics for Data Sets with Non -Detects 2 3 User Selected Options 4 Date/Time of Computation 7/10/2015 4:28:00 AM 5 From File fish_input.xls 6 Full Precision OFF 7 Confidence Coefficient 95% 8 Number of Bootstrap Operations 2000 9 10 11 Fat 12 13 General Statistics 14 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 15 Number of Missing Observations 0 16 Minimum 0.4 Mean 3.06 17 Maximum 9.5 Median 2.7 18 SD 2.461 Std. Error of Mean 0.778 19 Coefficient of Variation 0.804 Skewness 2.222 20 21 Normal GOF Test 22 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.74 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 23 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 24 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.329 Lilliefors GOF Test 25 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 26 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 27 28 Assuming Normal Distribution 29 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 30 95% Student's -t UCL 4.487 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 4.925 31 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 4.578 32 33 Gamma GOF Test 34 A -D Test Statistic 0.605 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 35 5% A -D Critical Value 0.736 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 36 K -S Test Statistic 0.234 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 37 5% K -S Critical Value 0.27 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 38 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 39 40 Gamma Statistics 41 k hat (MILE) 2.01 k star (bias corrected MILE) 1.474 42 Theta hat (MILE) 1.522 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 2.076 43 nu hat (MILE) 40.21 nu star (bias corrected) 29.48 44 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.06 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 2.52 45 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 18.08 46 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 16.55 47 48 Assuming Gamma Distribution 49 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50) 4.988 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5.451 50 51 Lognormal GOF Test 52 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.888 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 53 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 54 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.271 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 55 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 56 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 57 58 Lognormal Statistics 59 Minimum of Logged Data -0.916 Mean of logged Data 0.85 60 Maximum of Logged Data 2.251 SD of logged Data 0.829 61 62 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 63 95% H -UCL 7.073 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5.741 64 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.91 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8.533 65 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 11.72 66 67 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 68 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 69 70 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 71 95% CLT UCL 4.34 95% Jackknife UCL 4.487 72 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 4.251 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 5.61 73 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 10.45 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4.42 74 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.9 75 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5.395 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.453 76 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.921 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10.8 77 78 Suggested UCL to Use 79 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL 5.451 80 81 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 82 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 83 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 84 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 85 86 87 Moisture 88 89 General Statistics 90 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 91 Number of Missing Observations 0 92 Minimum 70.3 Mean 78.45 93 Maximum 84.2 Median 78.55 94 SD 3.768 Std. Error of Mean 1.192 95 Coefficient of Variation 0.048 Skewness -0.792 96 97 Normal GOF Test 98 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.945 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 99 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 100 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.16 Lilliefors GOF Test 101 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 102 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 103 104 Assuming Normal Distribution A B C I D E F G H I I I J I K L 105 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 106 95% Student's -t UCL 80.63 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 80.09 107 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 80.58 108 109 Gamma GOF Test 110 A -D Test Statistic 0.325 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 111 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 112 K -S Test Statistic 0.159 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 113 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 114 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 115 116 Gamma Statistics 117 k hat (MLE) 470.4 k star (bias corrected MLE) 329.4 118 Theta hat (MLE) 0.167 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.238 119 nu hat (MLE) 9408 nu star (bias corrected) 6587 120 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 78.45 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.323 121 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 6400 122 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 6367 123 124 Assuming Gamma Distribution 125 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 80.75 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 81.16 126 127 Lognormal GOF Test 128 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.932 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 129 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 130 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.17 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 131 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 132 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 133 134 Lognormal Statistics 135 Minimum of Logged Data 4.253 Mean of logged Data 4.361 136 Maximum of Logged Data 4.433 SD of logged Data 0.0489 137 138 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 139 95% H -UCL N/A 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 82.09 140 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 83.74 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 86.03 141 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 90.53 142 143 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1441 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 145 146 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 147 95% CLT UCL 80.41 95% Jackknife UCL 80.63 148 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 80.26 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 80.33 149 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 80.42 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 80.27 150 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 80.02 151 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 82.02 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 83.64 152 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 85.89 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 90.31 153 154 Suggested UCL to Use 155 95% Student's -t UCL 80.63 156 A I B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K I L 157 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 158 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 159 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 160 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 161 162 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 163 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 164 165 Arsenic (As) 166 167 General Statistics 168 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 2 169 Number of Detects 4 Number of Non -Detects 6 170 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 171 Minimum Detect 0.1 Minimum Non -Detect 0.1 172 Maximum Detect 0.2 Maximum Non -Detect 0.1 173 Variance Detects 0.0025 Percent Non -Detects 60% 174 Mean Detects 0.125 SD Detects 0.05 175 Median Detects 0.1 CV Detects 0.4 176 Skewness Detects 2 Kurtosis Detects 4 177 Mean of Logged Detects -2.129 SD of Logged Detects 0.347 178 179 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 180 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.63 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 181 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 182 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.441 Lilliefors GOF Test 183 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 184 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 185 186 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 187 Mean 0.11 Standard Error of Mean 0.011 188 SD 0.03 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 189 95% KM (t) UCL 0.13 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 190 95% KM (z) UCL 0.128 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 191 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.143 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.158 192 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.178 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.219 193 194 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 195 A -D Test Statistic 0.961 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 196 5% A -D Critical Value 0.657 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 197 K -S Test Statistic 0.469 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 198 5% K -S Critical Value 0.395 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 199 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 200 201 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 202 k hat (MLE) 10.19 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.715 203 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0123 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.046 204 nu hat (MLE) 81.54 nu star (bias corrected) 21.72 205 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.125 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0759 206 207 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 208 k hat (KM) 13.44 nu hat (KM) 268.9 A B I C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 209 Approximate Chi Square Value (268.89, a) 231.9 Adjusted Chi Square Value (268.89, R) 225.9 210 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.128 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.131 211 2121 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 213 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 214 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 215 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 216 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 217 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0603 2181 Maximum 0.2 Median 0.0313 219 SD 0.0634 CV 1.053 220 k hat (MLE) 0.985 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.756 221 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0612 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0797 222 nu hat (MLE) 19.71 nu star (bias corrected) 15.13 223 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0603 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0693 2241 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 225 Approximate Chi Square Value (15.13, a) 7.351 Adjusted Chi Square Value (15.13, R) 6.432 226 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.124 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) N/A 227 228 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 229 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.63 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 230 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.748 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 231 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.441 Lilliefors GOF Test 232 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.443 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 233 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 234 235 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 236 Mean in Original Scale 0.0758 Mean in Log Scale -2.774 237 SD in Original Scale 0.0525 SD in Log Scale 0.653 238 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.106 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.102 239 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.112 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.122 240 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.132 241 242 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 243 KM Mean (logged) -2.233 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.125 244 KM SD (logged) 0.208 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.888 245 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0759 246 247 DL/2 Statistics 2481 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 249 Mean in Original Scale 0.08 Mean in Log Scale -2.649 250 SD in Original Scale 0.0483 SD in Log Scale 0.49 251 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.108 95% H -Stat UCL 0.114 252 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 253 254 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 255 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 256 257 Suggested UCL to Use 258 95% KM (t) UCL 0.13 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 259 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 260 A I B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K I L 261 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 262 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 263 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 264 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 265 266 Barium (Ba) 267 268 General Statistics 269 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 5 270 Number of Detects 5 Number of Non -Detects 5 271 Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 272 Minimum Detect 1.4 Minimum Non -Detect 0.3 273 Maximum Detect 2.2 Maximum Non -Detect 0.3 274 Variance Detects 0.108 Percent Non -Detects 50% 275 Mean Detects 1.66 SD Detects 0.329 2761 Median Detects 1.6 CV Detects 0.198 277 Skewness Detects 1.434 Kurtosis Detects 2.094 278 Mean of Logged Detects 0.492 SD of Logged Detects 0.186 279 280 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 281 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.845 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 282 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 283 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.252 Lilliefors GOF Test 284 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 285 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 286 287 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2881 Mean 0.98 Standard Error of Mean 0.251 289 SD 0.711 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 290 95% KM (t) UCL 1.441 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 291 95% KM (z) UCL 1.394 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 292 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.734 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.076 293 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.55 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 3.481 294 295 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 296 A -D Test Statistic 0.426 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 297 5% A -D Critical Value 0.678 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 298 K -S Test Statistic 0.222 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 299 5% K -S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 3001 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 301 302 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 303 k hat (MILE) 34.86 k star (bias corrected MILE) 14.08 304 Theta hat (MILE) 0.0476 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 0.118 305 nu hat (MILE) 348.6 nu star (bias corrected) 140.8 3061 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.66 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 0.442 307 308 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 309 k hat (KM) 1.9 nu hat (KM) 37.99 310 Approximate Chi Square Value (37.99, a) 24.88 Adjusted Chi Square Value (37.99, R) 23.05 311 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 1.497 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 1.615 312 A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 313 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 314 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 315 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 3161 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 317 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 318 Minimum 0.37 Mean 1.198 319 Maximum 2.2 Median 1.221 320 SD 0.562 CV 0.469 321 k hat (MLE) 4.401 k star (bias corrected MLE) 3.147 322 Theta hat (MLE) 0.272 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.381 323 nu hat (MLE) 88.01 nu star (bias corrected) 62.94 324 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 1.198 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.675 325 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 326 Approximate Chi Square Value (62.94, a) 45.69 Adjusted Chi Square Value (62.94, R) 43.15 327 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 1.651 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1.748 328 329 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 330 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.872 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 331 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 332 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.219 Lilliefors GOF Test 333 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 334 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 335 336 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 337 Mean in Original Scale 1.296 Mean in Log Scale 0.205 338 SD in Original Scale 0.455 SD in Log Scale 0.349 339 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.56 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.517 340 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.538 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.595 341 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 1.651 342 343 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 344 KM Mean (logged) -0.356 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 2.259 345 KM SD (logged) 0.856 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.816 346 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.303 347 348 DL/2 Statistics 349 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 350 Mean in Original Scale 0.905 Mean in Log Scale -0.702 351 SD in Original Scale 0.825 SD in Log Scale 1.265 352 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.383 95% H -Stat UCL 5.196 353 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 354 355 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 356 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 357 358 Suggested UCL to Use 359 95% KM (t) UCL 1.441 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 360 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 361 362 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 363 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 13641 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). A I B I C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J I K I L 365 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 366 367 Cadmium (Cd) 368 369 General Statistics 370 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 6 371 Number of Detects 8 Number of Non -Detects 2 372 Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 373 Minimum Detect 0.01 Minimum Non -Detect 0.01 374 Maximum Detect 0.08 Maximum Non -Detect 0.01 375 Variance Detects 5.3571 E-4 Percent Non -Detects 20% 376 Mean Detects 0.0475 SD Detects 0.0231 377 Median Detects 0.055 CV Detects 0.487 378 Skewness Detects -0.518 Kurtosis Detects -0.43 379 Mean of Logged Detects -3.212 SD of Logged Detects 0.7 380 381 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 382 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.93 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 383 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 384 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.205 Lilliefors GOF Test 385 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 386 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 387 388 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 389 Mean 0.04 Standard Error of Mean 0.00828 390 SD 0.0245 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.051 391 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0552 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.053 392 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0536 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0534 393 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0648 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0761 394 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0917 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.122 395 396 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 397 A -D Test Statistic 0.591 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 398 5% A -D Critical Value 0.721 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 399 K -S Test Statistic 0.235 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 400 5% K -S Critical Value 0.296 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 401 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 402 403 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 404 k hat (MLE) 3.184 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.073 405 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0149 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0229 406 nu hat (MLE) 50.94 nu star (bias corrected) 33.17 407 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0475 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.033 408 409 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 410 k hat (KM) 2.667 nu hat (KM) 53.33 411 Approximate Chi Square Value (53.33, a) 37.56 Adjusted Chi Square Value (53.33, R) 35.27 412 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0568 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0605 413 4141 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 415 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 416 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 417 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 418 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 419 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0401 4201 Maximum 0.08 Median 0.045 421 SD 0.0257 CV 0.64 422 k hat (MLE) 2.046 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.499 423 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0196 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0268 424 nu hat (MLE) 40.92 nu star (bias corrected) 29.97 425 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0401 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0328 426 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0267 427 Approximate Chi Square Value (29.97, a) 18.47 Adjusted Chi Square Value (29.97, (3) 16.92 428 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0651 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0711 429 430 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 431 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.831 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 432 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 433 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.247 Lilliefors GOF Test 434 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 435 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 436 437 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 438 Mean in Original Scale 0.0398 Mean in Log Scale -3.517 439 SD in Original Scale 0.0261 SD in Log Scale 0.894 440 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0549 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0525 441 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.052 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0551 442 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.105 443 444 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 445 KM Mean (logged) -3.491 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.088 446 KM SD (logged) 0.808 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.725 447 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.273 448 449 DU2 Statistics 4501 DU2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 451 Mean in Original Scale 0.039 Mean in Log Scale -3.629 452 SD in Original Scale 0.0272 SD in Log Scale 1.074 453 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0547 95% H -Stat UCL 0.152 454 DU2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 455 456 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 457 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 458 459 Suggested UCL to Use 460 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0552 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.053 461 462 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 463 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 464 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 465 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 466 467 468 JCalclum (Ca) A B C D E F G H I J K L 469 470 General Statistics 471 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 472 Number of Missing Observations 0 4731 Minimum 69 Mean 4075 474 Maximum 9500 Median 3400 475 SD 4204 Std. Error of Mean 1330 476 Coefficient of Variation 1.032 Skewness 0.106 477 478 Normal GOF Test 479 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.759 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 480 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 481 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.309 Lilliefors GOF Test 482 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 483 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 484 485 Assuming Normal Distribution 486 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 487 95% Student's -t UCL 6513 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 6310 488 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 6520 489 490 Gamma GOF Test 491 A -D Test Statistic 1.184 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 492 5% A -D Critical Value 0.787 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 493 K -S Test Statistic 0.292 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 494 5% K -S Critical Value 0.283 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 495 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 496 497 Gamma Statistics 498 k hat (MLE) 0.447 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.38 499 Theta hat (MLE) 9111 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 10731 500 nu hat (MLE) 8.946 nu star (bias corrected) 7.596 501 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4075 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 6613 502 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 2.503 503 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 2.025 504 505 Assuming Gamma Distribution 506 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 12366 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 15285 507 508 Lognormal GOF Test 509 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.762 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 510 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 511 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.297 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 512 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 513 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 514 515 Lognormal Statistics 516 Minimum of Logged Data 4.234 Mean of logged Data 6.868 517 Maximum of Logged Data 9.159 SD of logged Data 2.281 518 519 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 520 95% H -UCL 1317540 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 22308 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K L 521 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 29216 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 38804 522 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 57637 523 5241 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 525 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 526 527 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 528 95% CLT UCL 6262 95% Jackknife UCL 6513 529 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 6111 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 6458 530 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 5765 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 6148 531 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5984 532 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8064 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 9871 533 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 12378 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 17304 534 535 Suggested UCL to Use 536 99% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 17304 537 538 Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation 539 540 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 541 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 542 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 543 1 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 544 545 Cobalt (Co) 546 547 General Statistics 548 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 549 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 1 550 Number of Distinct Detects 8 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 551 Minimum Detect 0.009 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 552 Maximum Detect 0.052 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 553 Variance Detects 2.5478E-4 Percent Non -Detects 10% 554 Mean Detects 0.0256 SD Detects 0.016 555 Median Detects 0.028 CV Detects 0.625 556 Skewness Detects 0.354 Kurtosis Detects -1.318 557 Mean of Logged Detects -3.872 SD of Logged Detects 0.706 558 559 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 560 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.888 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 561 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 562 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.247 Lilliefors GOF Test 563 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 564 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 565 566 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 567 Mean 0.0235 Standard Error of Mean 0.00522 568 SD 0.0156 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.0317 569 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0331 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0315 570 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0321 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.034 571 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0391 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0462 15721 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1 0.0561 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0754 A B C D E F G H I J K L 573 574 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 575 A -D Test Statistic 0.59 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 576 5% A -D Critical Value 0.728 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 577 K -S Test Statistic 0.25 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 578 5% K -S Critical Value 0.282 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 579 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 580 581 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 582 k hat (MLE) 2.595 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.804 583 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00985 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0142 584 nu hat (MLE) 46.7 nu star (bias corrected) 32.47 585 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0256 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.019 586 587 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 588 k hat (KM) 2.283 nu hat (KM) 45.67 589 Approximate Chi Square Value (45.67, a) 31.17 Adjusted Chi Square Value (45.67, R) 29.1 590 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0344 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0369 591 592 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 593 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 594 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 595 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 596 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 597 Minimum 0.009 Mean 0.024 598 Maximum 0.052 Median 0.02 599 SD 0.0158 CV 0.66 600 k hat (MLE) 2.475 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.799 601 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0097 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0133 602 nu hat (MLE) 49.49 nu star (bias corrected) 35.98 603 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.024 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0179 604 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 605 Approximate Chi Square Value (35.98, a) 23.25 Adjusted Chi Square Value (35.98, R) 21.49 606 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0371 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.0402 607 608 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 609 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.86 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 610 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 611 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.227 Lilliefors GOF Test 612 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 613 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 614 615 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 616 Mean in Original Scale 0.0234 Mean in Log Scale -4.04 617 SD in Original Scale 0.0165 SD in Log Scale 0.852 618 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.033 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.032 619 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0322 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0338 620 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0562 621 622 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 623 KM Mean (logged) -4.014 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0473 16241 KM SD (logged) 0.763 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.642 A B C I D I E F G H I J K L 625 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.256 626 627 DU2 Statistics 6281 DU2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 629 Mean in Original Scale 0.0233 Mean in Log Scale -4.084 630 SD in Original Scale 0.0167 SD in Log Scale 0.945 631 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0329 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0675 632 DU2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 633 634 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 635 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 636 637 Suggested UCL to Use 638 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0331 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.0315 639 640 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 641 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 642 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 643 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 644 645 Copper (Cu) 646 647 General Statistics 648 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 6 649 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 1 650 Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 651 Minimum Detect 0.5 Minimum Non -Detect 0.5 652 Maximum Detect 1.7 Maximum Non -Detect 0.5 653 Variance Detects 0.11 Percent Non -Detects 10% 654 Mean Detects 0.967 SD Detects 0.332 655 Median Detects 0.9 CV Detects 0.343 6561 Skewness Detects 1.248 Kurtosis Detects 2.946 657 Mean of Logged Detects -0.083 SD of Logged Detects 0.331 658 659 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 660 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.884 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 661 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 6621 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.233 Lilliefors GOF Test 663 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 664 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 665 666 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 667 Mean 0.92 Standard Error of Mean 0.11 6681 SD 0.328 95% KM (BCA) UCL 1.1 669 95% KM (t) UCL 1.122 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 1.09 670 95% KM (z) UCL 1.101 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 1.17 671 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.25 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.4 672 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1.607 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 2.015 673 6741 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 675 A -D Test Statistic 0.398 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 676 5% A -D Critical Value 0.722 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D I E F G H I I I J I K L 677 K -S Test Statistic 0.203 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 678 5% K -S Critical Value 0.279 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 680 681 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 682 k hat (MLE) 10.35 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.977 683 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0934 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.139 684 nu hat (MLE) 186.4 nu star (bias corrected) 125.6 685 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.967 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.366 686 687 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 688 k hat (KM) 7.866 nu hat (KM) 157.3 689 Approximate Chi Square Value (157.32, a) 129.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (157.32, R) 124.9 690 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 1.119 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 1.159 691 692 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 693 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 694 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 695 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 696 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 697 Minimum 0.314 Mean 0.901 698 Maximum 1.7 Median 0.85 699 SD 0.375 CV 0.416 700 k hat (MLE) 5.935 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.221 701 Theta hat (MLE) 0.152 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.214 702 nu hat (MLE) 118.7 nu star (bias corrected) 84.43 703 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.901 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.439 704 Adjusted Level of Significance ((3) 0.0267 705 Approximate Chi Square Value (84.43, a) 64.25 Adjusted Chi Square Value (84.43, (3) 61.2 706 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 1.185 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 1.244 707 708 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 709 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.938 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 710 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 711 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.225 Lilliefors GOF Test 712 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 713 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 714 715 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 716 Mean in Original Scale 0.912 Mean in Log Scale -0.161 717 SD in Original Scale 0.357 SD in Log Scale 0.399 718 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 1.119 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 1.1 719 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 1.13 95% Bootstrap t UCL 1.173 720 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 1.216 721 722 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 723 KM Mean (logged) -0.144 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 1.165 724 KM SD (logged) 0.348 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.029 725 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.117 726 727 DU2 Statistics 17281 DL/2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed A B C D E F G H I J I K L 729 Mean in Original Scale 0.895 Mean in Log Scale -0.213 730 SD in Original Scale 0.386 SD in Log Scale 0.517 731 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 1.119 95% H -Stat UCL 1.36 7321 DL12 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 733 734 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 735 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 736 737 Suggested UCL to Use 738 95% KM (t) UCL 1.122 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 1.09 739 740 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 741 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 742 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 743 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 744 745 746 Iron (Fe) 747 748 General Statistics 749 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 750 Number of Missing Observations 0 751 Minimum 6 Mean 54.8 752 Maximum 140 Median 44.5 753 SD 46.56 Std. Error of Mean 14.72 754 Coefficient of Variation 0.85 Skewness 0.667 755 756 Normal GOF Test 757 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.903 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 758 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 759 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.21 Lilliefors GOF Test 760 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 761 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 762 763 Assuming Normal Distribution 764 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 765 95% Student's -t UCL 81.79 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 82.34 766 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 82.31 767 768 Gamma GOF Test 769 A -D Test Statistic 0.311 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 770 5% A -D Critical Value 0.744 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 771 K -S Test Statistic 0.156 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 772 5% K -S Critical Value 0.272 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 773 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 774 775 Gamma Statistics 776 k hat (MLE) 1.257 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.947 777 Theta hat (MLE) 43.59 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 57.89 778 nu hat (MLE) 25.14 nu star (bias corrected) 18.93 779 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 54.8 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 56.32 780 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 10.07 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K I L 781 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 8.966 782 783 Assuming Gamma Distribution 784 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 103 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 115.7 785 786 Lognormal GOF Test 787 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.934 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 788 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 789 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.188 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 790 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 791 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 792 793 Lognormal Statistics 794 Minimum of Logged Data 1.792 Mean of logged Data 3.556 795 Maximum of Logged Data 4.942 SD of logged Data 1.098 796 797 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 798 95% H -UCL 214.6 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 123.3 799 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 152.5 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 193 800 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 272.6 801 802 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 803 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 804 805 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 806 95% CLT UCL 79.02 95% Jackknife UCL 81.79 807 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 77.44 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 88.07 808 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 83.41 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 78 809 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 80 810 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 98.97 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 119 811 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 146.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 201.3 812 813 Suggested UCL to Use 814 95% Student's -t UCL 81.79 815 816 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 817 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 818 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 819 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 820 821 Lead (Pb) 822 823 General Statistics 824 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 5 825 Number of Detects 5 Number of Non -Detects 5 826 Number of Distinct Detects 4 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 827 Minimum Detect 0.04 Minimum Non -Detect 0.03 828 Maximum Detect 0.09 Maximum Non -Detect 0.03 829 Variance Detects 3.3000E-4 Percent Non -Detects 50% 830 Mean Detects 0.064 SD Detects 0.0182 831 Median Detects 0.06 CV Detects 0.284 832 Skewness Detects 0.267 Kurtosis Detects 1.074 A B C D I E I F G H I J I K L 833 Mean of Logged Detects -2.783 SD of Logged Detects 0.295 834 835 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 8361 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.962 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 837 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 838 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.213 Lilliefors GOF Test 839 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 840 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 841 842 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 843 Mean 0.047 Standard Error of Mean 0.00725 844 SD 0.0205 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 845 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0603 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 846 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0589 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 847 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0688 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0786 848 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0923 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.119 849 850 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 851 A -D Test Statistic 0.274 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 852 5% A -D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 853 K -S Test Statistic 0.236 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 854 5% K -S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 855 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 856 857 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 858 k hat (MLE) 15 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.132 859 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00427 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0104 860 nu hat (MLE) 150 nu star (bias corrected) 61.32 861 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.064 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0258 862 863 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 864 k hat (KM) 5.247 nu hat (KM) 104.9 865 Approximate Chi Square Value (104.94, a) 82.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (104.94, R) 78.82 866 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0599 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0626 867 868 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 869 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 870 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 871 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 872 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 873 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.041 874 Maximum 0.09 Median 0.0353 875 SD 0.0277 CV 0.675 876 k hat (MLE) 2.115 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.547 877 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0194 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0265 878 nu hat (MLE) 42.3 nu star (bias corrected) 30.94 879 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.041 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.033 880 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 881 Approximate Chi Square Value (30.94, a) 19.23 Adjusted Chi Square Value (30.94, R) 17.65 882 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.066 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.072 883 18841 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only A B C I D I E F G H I I J K L 885 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.954 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 886 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 887 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.258 Lilliefors GOF Test 888 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 889 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 890 891 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 892 Mean in Original Scale 0.0451 Mean in Log Scale -3.226 893 SD in Original Scale 0.0237 SD in Log Scale 0.54 894 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0589 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0574 895 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0586 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0608 896 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.0692 897 898 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 899 KM Mean (logged) -3.145 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0622 900 KM SD (logged) 0.407 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.098 901 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.144 902 903 DL/2 Statistics 904 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 905 Mean in Original Scale 0.0395 Mean in Log Scale -3.491 906 SD in Original Scale 0.0285 SD in Log Scale 0.772 907 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.056 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0814 908 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 909 910 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 911 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 912 913 Suggested UCL to Use 914 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0603 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 915 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 916 917 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 918 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 919 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 920 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 921 922 923 Magnesium (Mg) 924 925 General Statistics 926 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 927 Number of Missing Observations 0 928 Minimum 230 Mean 325 929 Maximum 450 Median 305 930 SD 89.1 Std. Error of Mean 28.18 931 Coefficient of Variation 0.274 Skewness 0.212 932 933 Normal GOF Test 934 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.832 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 935 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 936 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.267 Lilliefors GOF Test A B C D E F G H I J K L 937 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 938 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 939 9401 Assuming Normal Distribution 941 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 942 95% Student's-t UCL 376.6 95% Adjusted-CLT UCL (Chen-1995) 373.4 943 95% Modified-t UCL (Johnson-1978) 377 944 945 Gamma GOF Test 946 A-D Test Statistic 0.852 Anderson-Darling Gamma GOF Test 947 5% A-D Critical Value 0.725 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 948 K-S Test Statistic 0.27 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 949 5% K-S Critical Value 0.266 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 950 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 951 952 Gamma Statistics 953 k hat (MILE) 14.8 k star (bias corrected MILE) 10.43 954 Theta hat (MILE) 21.96 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 31.17 955 nu hat (MILE) 296 nu star (bias corrected) 208.5 956 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 325 MILE Sd (bias corrected) 100.7 957 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 176.1 958 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 170.9 959 960 Assuming Gamma Distribution 961 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n>=50)) 384.8 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 396.5 962 963 Lognormal GOF Test 964 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.829 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 965 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 966 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.253 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 967 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 968 Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 969 970 Lognormal Statistics 971 Minimum of Logged Data 5.438 Mean of logged Data 5.75 972 Maximum of Logged Data 6.109 SD of logged Data 0.276 973 974 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 975 95% H-UCL 390.4 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 410.5 976 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 449.3 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 503 977 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 608.7 978 979 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 980 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 981 982 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 983 95% CLT UCL 371.3 95% Jackknife UCL 376.6 984 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 369.8 95% Bootstrap-t UCL 376.6 985 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 362.8 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 370 986 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 368 987 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 409.5 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 447.8 988 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 501 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 605.3 A B C D E F G H I J K L 989 990 Suggested UCL to Use 991 95% Student's -t UCL 376.6 992 993 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 994 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 995 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 996 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 997 998 Manganese (Mn) 999 1000 General Statistics 1001 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 6 1002 Number of Detects 6 Number of Non -Detects 4 1003 Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1004 Minimum Detect 0.3 Minimum Non -Detect 0.3 1005 Maximum Detect 7.8 Maximum Non -Detect 0.3 1006 Variance Detects 6.359 Percent Non -Detects 40% 1007 Mean Detects 4.867 SD Detects 2.522 1008 Median Detects 5.5 CV Detects 0.518 1009 Skewness Detects -1.284 Kurtosis Detects 2.591 1010 Mean of Logged Detects 1.245 SD of Logged Detects 1.216 1011 1012 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1013 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.889 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1014 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1015 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.25 Lilliefors GOF Test 1016 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.362 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1017 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1018 1019 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1020 Mean 3.04 Standard Error of Mean 0.991 1021 SD 2.861 95% KM (BCA) UCL 4.6 1022 95% KM (t) UCL 4.857 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 4.5 1023 95% KM (z) UCL 4.67 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 4.529 1024 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 6.013 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 7.36 1025 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 9.229 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 12.9 1026 1027 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1028 A -D Test Statistic 0.959 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1029 5% A -D Critical Value 0.707 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1030 K -S Test Statistic 0.367 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1031 5% K -S Critical Value 0.337 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1032 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1033 1034 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1035 k hat (MLE) 1.628 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.925 1036 Theta hat (MLE) 2.989 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5.26 1037 nu hat (MLE) 19.54 nu star (bias corrected) 11.1 1038 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4.867 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 5.06 1039 110401 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics A B C D E F G H I J K L 1041 k hat (KM) 1.129 nu hat (KM) 22.58 1042 Approximate Chi Square Value (22.58, a) 12.78 Adjusted Chi Square Value (22.58, R) 11.51 1043 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 5.373 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 5.963 1044 1045 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1046 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1047 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1048 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1049 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1050 Minimum 0.037 Mean 3.225 1051 Maximum 7.8 Median 2.838 1052 SD 2.855 CV 0.885 1053 k hat (MLE) 0.768 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.604 1054 Theta hat (MLE) 4.2 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 5.338 1055 nu hat (MLE) 15.36 nu star (bias corrected) 12.08 1056 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.225 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 4.149 1057 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 1058 Approximate Chi Square Value (12.08, a) 5.282 Adjusted Chi Square Value (12.08, R) 4.526 1059 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 7.377 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 8.611 1060 1061 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 10621 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.651 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1063 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.788 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1064 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.395 Lilliefors GOF Test 1065 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.362 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1066 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1067 10681 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1069 Mean in Original Scale 3.057 Mean in Log Scale 0.257 1070 SD in Original Scale 3 SD in Log Scale 1.612 1071 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 4.797 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 4.572 1072 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4.652 95% Bootstrap t UCL 4.793 1073 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 52.33 1074 1075 DL/2 Statistics 1076 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1077 Mean in Original Scale 2.98 Mean in Log Scale -0.0119 1078 SD in Original Scale 3.077 SD in Log Scale 1.858 1079 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 4.763 95% H -Stat UCL 127.2 1080 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1081 1082 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1083 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1084 1085 Suggested UCL to Use 1086 95% KM (t) UCL 4.857 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 4.5 1087 1088 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1089 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1090 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1091 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1092 A B C D E F G H I J K L 1093 1094 Mercury (Hg) 1095 10961 General Statistics 1097 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 1098 Number of Missing Observations 0 1099 Minimum 0.022 Mean 0.0882 1100 Maximum 0.17 Median 0.081 1101 SD 0.061 Std. Error of Mean 0.0193 1102 Coefficient of Variation 0.692 Skewness 0.188 1103 1104 Normal GOF Test 1105 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.83 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1106 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1107 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.276 Lilliefors GOF Test 1108 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1109 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1110 1111 Assuming Normal Distribution 1112 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1113 95% Student's -t UCL 0.124 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.121 1114 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.124 1115 1116 Gamma GOF Test 1117 A -D Test Statistic 0.808 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1118 5% A -D Critical Value 0.736 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1119 K -S Test Statistic 0.255 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1120 5% K -S Critical Value 0.27 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1121 Detected data follow Appr. Gamma Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1122 1123 Gamma Statistics 1124 k hat (MLE) 1.978 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.451 1125 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0446 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0608 1126 nu hat (MLE) 39.56 nu star (bias corrected) 29.02 1127 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0882 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0732 1128 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 17.73 1129 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 16.21 1130 1131 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1132 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 0.144 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.158 1133 1134 Lognormal GOF Test 1135 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.845 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1136 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1137 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.261 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1138 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1139 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1140 1141 Lognormal Statistics 1142 Minimum of Logged Data -3.817 Mean of logged Data -2.702 1143 Maximum of Logged Data -1.772 SD of logged Data 0.82 1144 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1145 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1146 95% H -UCL 0.199 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.163 1147 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.196 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.241 1148 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.331 1149 1150 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1151 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1152 1153 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1154 95% CLT UCL 0.12 95% Jackknife UCL 0.124 1155 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.118 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 0.127 1156 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.114 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.121 1157 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.12 1158 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.146 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.172 1159 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.209 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.28 1160 1161 Suggested UCL to Use 1162 95% Student's -t UCL 0.124 1163 1164 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1165 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1166 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1167 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1168 1169 Nickel (Ni) 1170 1171 General Statistics 1172 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 5 1173 Number of Detects 5 Number of Non -Detects 5 1174 Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1175 Minimum Detect 0.05 Minimum Non -Detect 0.05 1176 Maximum Detect 0.13 Maximum Non -Detect 0.05 1177 Variance Detects 9.3000E-4 Percent Non -Detects 50% 1178 Mean Detects 0.086 SD Detects 0.0305 1179 Median Detects 0.08 CV Detects 0.355 1180 Skewness Detects 0.543 Kurtosis Detects -0.00347 1181 Mean of Logged Detects -2.505 SD of Logged Detects 0.361 1182 1183 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1184 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.981 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1185 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1186 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.178 Lilliefors GOF Test 1187 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1188 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1189 1190 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1191 Mean 0.068 Standard Error of Mean 0.00933 1192 SD 0.0264 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.083 1193 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0851 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.082 1194 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0833 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.0871 1195 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.096 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.109 111961 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 1 0.126 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.161 A B C D E F G H I J K L 1197 1198 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1199 A -D Test Statistic 0.167 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1200 5% A -D Critical Value 0.679 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1201 K -S Test Statistic 0.147 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1202 5% K -S Critical Value 0.358 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1203 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1204 1205 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1206 k hat (MLE) 9.911 k star (bias corrected MLE) 4.098 1207 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00868 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.021 1208 nu hat (MLE) 99.11 nu star (bias corrected) 40.98 1209 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.086 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0425 1210 1211 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1212 k hat (KM) 6.644 nu hat (KM) 132.9 1213 Approximate Chi Square Value (132.87, a) 107.2 Adjusted Chi Square Value (132.87, R) 103.2 1214 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0843 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0875 1215 1216 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1217 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 12181 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1219 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1220 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1221 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.0506 1222 Maximum 0.13 Median 0.0395 1223 SD 0.0428 CV 0.845 12241 k hat (MLE) 1.363 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.021 1225 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0372 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0496 1226 nu hat (MLE) 27.26 nu star (bias corrected) 20.41 1227 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0506 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0501 1228 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 1229 Approximate Chi Square Value (20.41, a) 11.16 Adjusted Chi Square Value (20.41, R) 9.988 1230 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0927 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.104 1231 1232 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1233 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.996 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1234 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1235 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.134 Lilliefors GOF Test 1236 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1237 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1238 1239 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1240 Mean in Original Scale 0.0568 Mean in Log Scale -3.072 1241 SD in Original Scale 0.0374 SD in Log Scale 0.687 1242 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0785 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0757 1243 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0777 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0855 1244 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.104 1245 1246 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1247 KM Mean (logged) -2.75 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.0847 112481 KM SD (logged) 0.335 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.015 A B C I D I E F G H I J K L 1249 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.119 1250 1251 DU2 Statistics 12521 DU2 Normal DU2 Log -Transformed 1253 Mean in Original Scale 0.0555 Mean in Log Scale -3.097 1254 SD in Original Scale 0.038 SD in Log Scale 0.669 1255 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0776 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0983 1256 DU2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1257 1258 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1259 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1260 1261 Suggested UCL to Use 1262 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0851 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.082 1263 1264 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1265 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1266 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1267 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1268 1269 1270 Phosphorus (P) 1271 1272 General Statistics 1273 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 1274 Number of Missing Observations 0 1275 Minimum 2100 Mean 4050 1276 Maximum 6300 Median 3800 1277 SD 1907 Std. Error of Mean 603.2 1278 Coefficient of Variation 0.471 Skewness 0.0612 1279 1280 Normal GOF Test 1281 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.755 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1282 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1283 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.306 Lilliefors GOF Test 1284 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1285 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1286 1287 Assuming Normal Distribution 1288 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1289 95% Student's -t UCL 5156 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 5055 1290 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 5158 1291 1292 Gamma GOF Test 1293 A -D Test Statistic 1.277 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1294 5% A -D Critical Value 0.729 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1295 K -S Test Statistic 0.311 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1296 5% K -S Critical Value 0.268 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1297 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1298 1299 Gamma Statistics 113001 k hat (MLE) 4.699 k star (bias corrected MILE) 3.356 A B C D I E F G H I I J I K L 1301 Theta hat (MLE) 861.9 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1207 1302 nu hat (MLE) 93.97 nu star (bias corrected) 67.11 1303 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 4050 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2211 13041 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 49.26 1305 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 46.61 1306 1307 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1308 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n-50)) 5518 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 5831 1309 1310 Lognormal GOF Test 1311 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.749 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1312 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1313 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.294 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1314 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1315 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1316 1317 Lognormal Statistics 1318 Minimum of Logged Data 7.65 Mean of logged Data 8.196 1319 Maximum of Logged Data 8.748 SD of logged Data 0.503 1320 1321 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1322 95% H -UCL 5979 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6034 1323 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6928 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 8169 1324 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 10607 1325 1326 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1327 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 1328 1329 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1330 95% CLT UCL 5042 95% Jackknife UCL 5156 1331 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5007 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 5229 1332 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 4806 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5000 1333 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 4940 1334 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5860 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6679 1335 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7817 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 10052 1336 1337 Suggested UCL to Use 1338 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 6679 1339 1340 Recommended UCL exceeds the maximum observation 1341 1342 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1343 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1344 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1345 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1346 1347 1348 Potassium (K) 1349 1350 General Statistics 1351 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 8 113521 1 1 Number of Missing Observations 0 A B C D T E F G H I J K L 1353 Minimum 2900 Mean 3460 1354 Maximum 4700 Median 3300 1355 SD 575.8 Std. Error of Mean 182.1 13561 Coefficient of Variation 0.166 Skewness 1.114 1357 1358 Normal GOF Test 1359 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.86 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1360 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1361 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.234 Lilliefors GOF Test 1362 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1363 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1364 1365 Assuming Normal Distribution 1366 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1367 95% Student's -t UCL 3794 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 3828 1368 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 3804 1369 1370 Gamma GOF Test 1371 A -D Test Statistic 0.581 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1372 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1373 K -S Test Statistic 0.245 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1374 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1375 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1376 1377 Gamma Statistics 1378 k hat (MLE) 43.23 k star (bias corrected MLE) 30.33 1379 Theta hat (MLE) 80.03 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 114.1 1380 nu hat (MLE) 864.6 nu star (bias corrected) 606.6 1381 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3460 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 628.3 1382 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 550.5 1383 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 541.1 1384 1385 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1386 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 3813 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 3878 1387 1388 Lognormal GOF Test 1389 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.88 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1390 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1391 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.233 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1392 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1393 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1394 1395 Lognormal Statistics 1396 Minimum of Logged Data 7.972 Mean of logged Data 8.137 1397 Maximum of Logged Data 8.455 SD of logged Data 0.158 1398 1399 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1400 95% H -UCL 3816 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 3978 1401 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4213 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 4540 1402 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 5181 1403 1404 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 1405 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1406 1407 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1408 95% CLT UCL 3760 95% Jackknife UCL 3794 1409 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 3742 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 3915 1410 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 3860 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 3740 1411 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 3800 1412 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4006 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4254 1413 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 4597 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 5272 1414 1415 Suggested UCL to Use 1416 95% Student's -t UCL 3794 1417 1418 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1419 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1420 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1421 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1422 1423 1424 Selenium (Se) 1425 1426 General Statistics 1427 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 3 1428 Number of Missing Observations 0 1429 Minimum 0.5 Mean 0.6 1430 Maximum 0.8 Median 0.6 1431 SD 0.0816 Std. Error of Mean 0.0258 1432 Coefficient of Variation 0.136 Skewness 1.531 1433 1434 Normal GOF Test 1435 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.701 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1436 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1437 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.4 Lilliefors GOF Test 1438 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1439 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1440 1441 Assuming Normal Distribution 1442 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1443 95% Student's -t UCL 0.647 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.656 1444 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.649 1445 1446 Gamma GOF Test 1447 A -D Test Statistic 1.488 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1448 5% A -D Critical Value 0.724 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1449 K -S Test Statistic 0.384 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1450 5% K -S Critical Value 0.266 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1451 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1452 1453 Gamma Statistics 1454 k hat (MLE) 65.13 k star (bias corrected MILE) 45.66 1455 Theta hat (MILE) 0.00921 Theta star (bias corrected MILE) 0.0131 1456 nu hat (MILE) 1303 nu star (bias corrected) 913.2 A B C I D I E F G H I J I K L 1457 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.6 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0888 1458 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 844.1 1459 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 832.5 1460 1461 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1462 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n-50)) 0.649 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.658 1463 1464 Lognormal GOF Test 1465 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.731 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1466 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1467 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.376 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1468 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1469 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1470 1471 Lognormal Statistics 1472 Minimum of Logged Data -0.693 Mean of logged Data -0.519 1473 Maximum of Logged Data -0.223 SD of logged Data 0.129 1474 1475 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1476 95% H -UCL 0.649 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.673 1477 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.706 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.752 1478 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.843 1479 1480 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1481 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 1482 1483 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1484 95% CLT UCL 0.642 95% Jackknife UCL 0.647 1485 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Bootstrap -t UCL N/A 1486 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL N/A 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL N/A 1487 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL N/A 1488 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.677 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.713 1489 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.761 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.857 1490 1491 Suggested UCL to Use 1492 95% Student's -t UCL 0.647 or 95% Modified -t UCL 0.649 1493 1494 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1495 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1496 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1497 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1498 1499 1500 Sodium (Na) 1501 1502 General Statistics 1503 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 9 1504 Number of Missing Observations 0 1505 Minimum 330 Mean 566 1506 Maximum 750 Median 605 1507 SD 165.8 Std. Error of Mean 52.43 1508 Coefficient of Variation 0.293 Skewness -0.288 A B C D E F G H I J K L 1509 1510 Normal GOF Test 1511 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.88 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1512 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1513 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.176 Lilliefors GOF Test 1514 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1515 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1516 1517 Assuming Normal Distribution 1518 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1519 95% Student's -t UCL 662.1 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 647.1 1520 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 661.3 1521 1522 Gamma GOF Test 1523 A -D Test Statistic 0.564 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1524 5% A -D Critical Value 0.725 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1525 K -S Test Statistic 0.201 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1526 5% K -S Critical Value 0.267 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1527 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1528 1529 Gamma Statistics 1530 k hat (MLE) 11.78 k star (bias corrected MLE) 8.31 1531 Theta hat (MLE) 48.06 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 68.11 1532 nu hat (MLE) 235.5 nu star (bias corrected) 166.2 1533 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 566 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 196.3 1534 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 137.4 1535 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 132.8 1536 1537 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1538 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 684.7 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 708.1 1539 1540 Lognormal GOF Test 1541 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.871 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1542 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1543 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.199 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1544 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1545 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1546 1547 Lognormal Statistics 1548 Minimum of Logged Data 5.799 Mean of logged Data 6.296 1549 Maximum of Logged Data 6.62 SD of logged Data 0.318 1550 1551 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1552 95% H -UCL 704.5 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 739.6 1553 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 817.7 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 926.1 1554 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 1139 1555 1556 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1557 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 1558 1559 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1560 95% CLT UCL 652.2 95% Jackknife UCL 662.1 A B C I D I E F G H I J I K L 1561 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 649.8 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 658.9 1562 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 641.3 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 647 1563 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 647 1564 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 723.3 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 794.6 1565 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 893.5 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 1088 1566 1567 Suggested UCL to Use 1568 95% Student's -t UCL 662.1 1569 1570 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1571 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1572 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1573 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1574 1575 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 1576 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 1577 1578 Strontium (Sr) 1579 1580 General Statistics 1581 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 6 15821 Number of Detects 5 Number of Non -Detects 5 1583 Number of Distinct Detects 5 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1584 Minimum Detect 11 Minimum Non -Detect 0.5 1585 Maximum Detect 15 Maximum Non -Detect 0.5 1586 Variance Detects 2.5 Percent Non -Detects 50% 1587 Mean Detects 13 SD Detects 1.581 1588 Median Detects 13 CV Detects 0.122 1589 Skewness Detects 0 Kurtosis Detects -1.2 1590 Mean of Logged Detects 2.559 SD of Logged Detects 0.123 1591 1592 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1593 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.987 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1594 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1595 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.136 Lilliefors GOF Test 1596 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1597 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1598 1599 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1600 Mean 6.75 Standard Error of Mean 2.238 1601 SD 6.329 95% KM (BCA) UCL 10.1 1602 95% KM (t) UCL 10.85 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 9.9 1603 95% KM (z) UCL 10.43 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 8.251 1604 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 13.46 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 16.5 1605 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 20.73 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 29.02 1606 1607 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1608 A -D Test Statistic 0.181 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1609 5% A -D Critical Value 0.678 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1610 K -S Test Statistic 0.165 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1611 5% K -S Critical Value 0.357 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 116121 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 1613 1614 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1615 k hat (MLE) 83.81 k star (bias corrected MLE) 33.66 16161 Theta hat (MLE) 0.155 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.386 1617 nu hat (MLE) 838.1 nu star (bias corrected) 336.6 1618 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 13 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.241 1619 1620 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1621 k hat (KM) 1.137 nu hat (KM) 22.75 1622 Approximate Chi Square Value (22.75, a) 12.9 Adjusted Chi Square Value (22.75, R) 11.63 1623 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 11.9 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 13.2 1624 1625 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1626 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1627 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1628 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1629 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1630 Minimum 6.339 Mean 10.64 1631 Maximum 15 Median 10.44 1632 SD 2.853 CV 0.268 1633 k hat (MLE) 14.85 k star (bias corrected MLE) 10.46 1634 Theta hat (MLE) 0.717 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.018 1635 nu hat (MLE) 296.9 nu star (bias corrected) 209.2 1636 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 10.64 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 3.291 1637 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 1638 Approximate Chi Square Value (209.19, a) 176.7 Adjusted Chi Square Value (209.19, R) 171.5 1639 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 12.6 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 12.98 1640 1641 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1642 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.985 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1643 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.762 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1644 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.143 Lilliefors GOF Test 1645 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.396 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1646 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1647 1648 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1649 Mean in Original Scale 10.92 Mean in Log Scale 2.367 1650 SD in Original Scale 2.529 SD in Log Scale 0.233 1651 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 12.39 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 12.18 1652 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 12.12 95% Bootstrap t UCL 12.43 1653 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 12.71 1654 1655 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1656 KM Mean (logged) 0.933 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 110.2 1657 KM SD (logged) 1.628 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 4.505 1658 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.576 1659 1660 DU2 Statistics 1661 DU2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1662 Mean in Original Scale 6.625 Mean in Log Scale 0.586 1663 SD in Original Scale 6.802 SD in Log Scale 2.081 1664 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 10.57 95% H -Stat UCL 757.9 A B C I D I E I F I G I H I I I J K L 1665 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1666 1667 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 16681 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1669 1670 Suggested UCL to Use 1671 95% KM (t) UCL 10.85 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 9.9 1672 1673 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1674 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1675 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1676 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1677 1678 Thallium (TI) 1679 1680 General Statistics 1681 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 4 1682 Number of Detects 7 Number of Non -Detects 3 1683 Number of Distinct Detects 3 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1684 Minimum Detect 0.004 Minimum Non -Detect 0.003 1685 Maximum Detect 0.006 Maximum Non -Detect 0.003 1686 Variance Detects 4.7619E-7 Percent Non -Detects 30% 1687 Mean Detects 0.00514 SD Detects 6.9007E-4 1688 Median Detects 0.005 CV Detects 0.134 1689 Skewness Detects -0.174 Kurtosis Detects 0.336 1690 Mean of Logged Detects -5.278 SD of Logged Detects 0.137 1691 1692 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1693 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.841 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1694 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1695 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.296 Lilliefors GOF Test 1696 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1697 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1698 1699 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1700 Mean 0.0045 Standard Error of Mean 3.8188E-4 1701 SD 0.00112 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 1702 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0052 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 1703 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00513 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 1704 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00565 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00616 1705 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00688 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0083 1706 1707 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1708 A -D Test Statistic 0.701 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 1709 5% A -D Critical Value 0.708 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1710 K -S Test Statistic 0.286 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 1711 5% K -S Critical Value 0.311 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1712 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1713 1714 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1715 k hat (MLE) 63.01 k star (bias corrected MLE) 36.1 1716 Theta hat (MLE) 8.1624E-5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.4247E-4 A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 1717 nu hat (MLE) 882.1 nu star (bias corrected) 505.4 1718 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.00514 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 8.5597E-4 1719 17201 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1721 k hat (KM) 16.2 nu hat (KM) 324 1722 Approximate Chi Square Value (324.00, a) 283.3 Adjusted Chi Square Value (324.00, R) 276.7 1723 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00515 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00527 1724 1725 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 1726 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 1727 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 1728 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 1729 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 1730 Minimum 0.004 Mean 0.0066 1731 Maximum 0.01 Median 0.0055 1732 SD 0.00241 CV 0.366 1733 k hat (MLE) 9.166 k star (bias corrected MLE) 6.483 1734 Theta hat (MLE) 7.2002E-4 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.00102 1735 nu hat (MLE) 183.3 nu star (bias corrected) 129.7 1736 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.0066 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.00259 1737 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 1738 Approximate Chi Square Value (129.66, a) 104.4 Adjusted Chi Square Value (129.66, R) 100.4 1739 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0082 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.00852 1740 1741 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1742 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.836 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1743 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.803 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1744 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.299 Lilliefors GOF Test 1745 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.335 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1746 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1747 1748 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1749 Mean in Original Scale 0.00471 Mean in Log Scale -5.374 1750 SD in Original Scale 9.0222E-4 SD in Log Scale 0.194 1751 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.00524 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00517 1752 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00517 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.00526 1753 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00533 1754 1755 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 1756 KM Mean (logged) -5.437 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00535 1757 KM SD (logged) 0.266 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.942 1758 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0907 1759 1760 DL/2 Statistics 1761 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1762 Mean in Original Scale 0.00405 Mean in Log Scale -5.645 1763 SD in Original Scale 0.00185 SD in Log Scale 0.602 1764 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00512 95% H -Stat UCL 0.00682 1765 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1766 1767 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 117681 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level A B C D E F G H I J K L 1769 1770 Suggested UCL to Use 1771 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0052 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 17721 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 1773 1774 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1775 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1776 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1777 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1778 1779 1780 Titanium (Ti) 1781 1782 General Statistics 1783 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 8 1784 Number of Missing Observations 0 1785 Minimum 1.7 Mean 3.99 1786 Maximum 7.5 Median 3.4 1787 SD 2.336 Std. Error of Mean 0.739 1788 Coefficient of Variation 0.586 Skewness 0.258 1789 1790 Normal GOF Test 1791 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.808 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1792 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1793 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.303 Lilliefors GOF Test 1794 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1795 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1796 1797 Assuming Normal Distribution 1798 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1799 95% Student's -t UCL 5.344 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 5.27 1800 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 5.354 1801 1802 Gamma GOF Test 1803 A -D Test Statistic 1.066 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1804 5% A -D Critical Value 0.732 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1805 K -S Test Statistic 0.31 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1806 5% K -S Critical Value 0.268 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1807 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1808 1809 Gamma Statistics 1810 k hat (MLE) 3.038 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.193 1811 Theta hat (MLE) 1.313 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 1.819 1812 nu hat (MLE) 60.76 nu star (bias corrected) 43.87 1813 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 3.99 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 2.694 1814 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 29.68 1815 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 27.66 1816 1817 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1818 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 5.898 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 6.327 1819 118201 Lognormal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I I J I K L 1821 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.787 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1822 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1823 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.293 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1824 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1825 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1826 1827 Lognormal Statistics 1828 Minimum of Logged Data 0.531 Mean of logged Data 1.21 1829 Maximum of Logged Data 2.015 SD of logged Data 0.634 1830 1831 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1832 95% H -UCL 6.837 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 6.479 1833 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 7.599 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 9.154 1834 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 12.21 1835 1836 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1837 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution (0.05) 1838 1839 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 1840 95% CLT UCL 5.205 95% Jackknife UCL 5.344 1841 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 5.182 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 5.508 1842 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 4.99 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 5.16 1843 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 5.28 1844 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 6.207 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 7.211 1845 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 8.604 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 11.34 1846 1847 Suggested UCL to Use 1848 95% Chebyshev (Mean, Sd) UCL 7.211 1849 1850 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1851 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 1852 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 1853 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1854 1855 Uranium (U) 1856 1857 General Statistics 1858 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 3 1859 Number of Detects 3 Number of Non -Detects 7 1860 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 1861 Minimum Detect 0.006 Minimum Non -Detect 0.005 1862 Maximum Detect 0.007 Maximum Non -Detect 0.005 1863 Variance Detects 3.3333E-7 Percent Non -Detects 70% 1864 Mean Detects 0.00667 SD Detects 5.7735E-4 18651 Median Detects 0.007 CV Detects 0.0866 1866 Skewness Detects -1.732 Kurtosis Detects N/A 1867 Mean of Logged Detects -5.013 SD of Logged Detects 0.089 1868 1869 Warning: Data set has only 3 Detected Values. 1870 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 1871 1872 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 1873 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 1874 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1875 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 18761 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 1877 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1878 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1879 1880 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 1881 Mean 0.0055 Standard Error of Mean 3.1225E-4 1882 SD 8.0623E-4 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 1883 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00607 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 1884 95% KM (z) UCL 0.00601 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 1885 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00644 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00686 1886 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00745 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.00861 1887 1888 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 1889 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 1890 1891 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 1892 k hat (MLE) 193 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 1893 Theta hat (MLE) 3.4549E-5 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 1894 nu hat (MLE) 1158 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 1895 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 1896 1897 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 1898 k hat (KM) 46.54 nu hat (KM) 930.8 1899 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 19001 Approximate Chi Square Value (930.77, a) 861 Adjusted Chi Square Value (930.77, R) 849.3 1901 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.00595 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.00603 1902 1903 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 1904 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.75 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1905 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.767 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 19061 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.385 Lilliefors GOF Test 1907 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.512 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1908 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1909 1910 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 1911 Mean in Original Scale 0.0054 Mean in Log Scale -5.237 19121 SD in Original Scale 0.00103 SD in Log Scale 0.188 1913 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.006 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.00594 1914 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.00595 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0061 1915 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.00608 1916 1917 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 19181 KM Mean (logged) -5.213 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.00597 1919 KM SD (logged) 0.137 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 1.829 1920 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.0529 1921 1922 DL/2 Statistics 1923 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 1924 Mean in Original Scale 0.00375 Mean in Log Scale -5.698 A B C D I E F G H I J I K L 1925 SD in Original Scale 0.00203 SD in Log Scale 0.474 1926 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.00493 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0053 1927 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 1928 1929 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1930 Detected Data appear Approximate Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1931 1932 Suggested UCL to Use 1933 95% KM (t) UCL 0.00607 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 1934 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 1935 1936 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 1937 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 1938 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 1939 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 1940 1941 1942 Zinc (Zn) 1943 1944 General Statistics 1945 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 10 1946 Number of Missing Observations 0 1947 Minimum 3 Mean 35.1 1948 Maximum 67 Median 35.5 1949 SD 28.16 Std. Error of Mean 8.904 1950 Coefficient of Variation 0.802 Skewness -0.0169 1951 1952 Normal GOF Test 1953 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.796 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 1954 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 1955 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.26 Lilliefors GOF Test 1956 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 1957 Data appear Approximate Normal at 5% Significance Level 1958 1959 Assuming Normal Distribution 1960 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 1961 95% Student's -t UCL 51.42 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 49.69 1962 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 51.41 1963 1964 Gamma GOF Test 1965 A -D Test Statistic 0.804 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 1966 5% A -D Critical Value 0.746 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1967 K -S Test Statistic 0.294 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 1968 5% K -S Critical Value 0.273 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1969 Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 1970 1971 Gamma Statistics 1972 k hat (MLE) 1.117 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.848 1973 Theta hat (MLE) 31.44 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 41.38 1974 nu hat (MLE) 22.33 nu star (bias corrected) 16.97 1975 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 35.1 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 38.11 119761 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 8.647 A B C I D I E F G H I I J I K L 1977 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0267 Adjusted Chi Square Value 7.637 1978 1979 Assuming Gamma Distribution 1980 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 68.86 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 77.97 1981 1982 Lognormal GOF Test 1983 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.839 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 1984 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.842 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1985 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.283 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 1986 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.28 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1987 Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 1988 1989 Lognormal Statistics 1990 Minimum of Logged Data 1.099 Mean of logged Data 3.048 1991 Maximum of Logged Data 4.205 SD of logged Data 1.226 1992 1993 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 1994 95% H -UCL 193.3 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 88.99 1995 95%Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 111.2 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 142.1 1996 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 202.6 1997 1998 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 1999 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2000 2001 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 2002 95% CLT UCL 49.75 95% Jackknife UCL 51.42 2003 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 49 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 52.25 2004 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 46.02 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 50.2 2005 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 49.6 2006 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 61.81 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 73.91 2007 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 90.7 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 123.7 2008 2009 Suggested UCL to Use 2010 95% Student's -t UCL 51.42 2011 2012 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2013 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) 2014 and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. 2015 For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2016 2017 Note: For highly negatively -skewed data, confidence limits (e.g., Chen, Johnson, Lognormal, and Gamma) may not be 2018 reliable. Chen's and Johnson's methods provide adjustments for positvely skewed data sets. 2019 2020 Aroclor 1254 2021 2022 General Statistics 2023 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 7 2024 Number of Detects 8 Number of Non -Detects 2 2025 Number of Distinct Detects 6 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2026 Minimum Detect 0.04 Minimum Non -Detect 0.03 2027 Maximum Detect 0.21 Maximum Non -Detect 0.03 2028 Variance Detects 1 0.00293 Percent Non -Detects 20% A B C D I E F G H I J K L 2029 Mean Detects 0.101 SD Detects 0.0541 2030 Median Detects 0.08 CV Detects 0.534 2031 Skewness Detects 1.23 Kurtosis Detects 1.497 20321 Mean of Logged Detects -2.407 SD of Logged Detects 0.515 2033 2034 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2035 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.892 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2036 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2037 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.278 Lilliefors GOF Test 2038 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2039 Detected Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2040 2041 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2042 Mean 0.087 Standard Error of Mean 0.0181 2043 SD 0.0535 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.116 2044 95% KM (t) UCL 0.12 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.117 2045 95% KM (z) UCL 0.117 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.134 2046 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.141 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.166 2047 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.2 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.267 2048 2049 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2050 A -D Test Statistic 0.299 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2051 5% A -D Critical Value 0.719 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2052 K -S Test Statistic 0.249 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2053 5% K -S Critical Value 0.295 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2054 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2055 2056 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2057 k hat (MLE) 4.437 k star (bias corrected MLE) 2.856 2058 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0228 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0354 2059 nu hat (MLE) 70.99 nu star (bias corrected) 45.7 2060 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.101 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0599 2061 2062 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2063 k hat (KM) 2.646 nu hat (KM) 52.91 2064 Approximate Chi Square Value (52.91, a) 37.2 Adjusted Chi Square Value (52.91, R) 34.92 2065 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.124 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.132 2066 2067 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 20681 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 2069 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2070 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2071 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2072 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.083 2073 Maximum 0.21 Median 0.08 20741 SD 0.0613 CV 0.738 2075 k hat (MLE) 1.543 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.147 2076 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0538 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.0724 2077 nu hat (MLE) 30.86 nu star (bias corrected) 22.94 2078 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.083 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.0775 2079 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 120801 Approximate Chi Square Value (22.94, a) 1 13.04 Adjusted Chi Square Value (22.94, R) 11.77 A I B I C I D I E F G H I I I J I K I L 2081 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.146 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.162 2082 2083 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 20841 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.969 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2085 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.818 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2086 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.216 Lilliefors GOF Test 2087 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.313 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2088 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2089 2090 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2091 Mean in Original Scale 0.0861 Mean in Log Scale -2.66 2092 SD in Original Scale 0.0574 SD in Log Scale 0.704 2093 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.119 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.117 2094 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.12 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.135 2095 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.163 2096 2097 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2098 KM Mean (logged) -2.627 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.143 2099 KM SD (logged) 0.616 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.393 2100 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.208 2101 2102 DL/2 Statistics 2103 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2104 Mean in Original Scale 0.084 Mean in Log Scale -2.766 2105 SD in Original Scale 0.06 SD in Log Scale 0.882 2106 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.119 95% H -Stat UCL 0.216 2107 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2108 2109 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2110 Detected Data appear Normal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2111 2112 Suggested UCL to Use 2113 95% KM (t) UCL 0.12 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.117 2114 2115 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2116 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2117 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2118 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2119 2120 Aroclor 1260 2121 2122 General Statistics 2123 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 8 2124 Number of Detects 9 Number of Non -Detects 1 2125 Number of Distinct Detects 7 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2126 Minimum Detect 0.04 Minimum Non -Detect 0.03 2127 Maximum Detect 0.31 Maximum Non -Detect 0.03 2128 Variance Detects 0.0125 Percent Non -Detects 10% 2129 Mean Detects 0.126 SD Detects 0.112 2130 Median Detects 0.06 CV Detects 0.891 2131 Skewness Detects 1.021 Kurtosis Detects -0.944 121321 Mean of Logged Detects -2.41 SD of Logged Detects 0.842 A B C D E F G H I J K L 2133 2134 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2135 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.742 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2136 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 2137 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.357 Lilliefors GOF Test 2138 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 2139 Detected Data Not Normal at 5% Significance Level 2140 2141 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2142 Mean 0.116 Standard Error of Mean 0.0349 2143 SD 0.104 95% KM (BCA) UCL 0.174 2144 95% KM (t) UCL 0.18 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL 0.175 2145 95% KM (z) UCL 0.173 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL 0.222 2146 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.221 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.268 2147 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.334 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.464 2148 2149 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2150 A -D Test Statistic 0.963 Anderson -Darling GOF Test 2151 5% A -D Critical Value 0.733 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2152 K -S Test Statistic 0.325 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff GOF 2153 5% K -S Critical Value 0.284 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2154 Detected Data Not Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2155 2156 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2157 k hat (MLE) 1.64 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.167 2158 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0766 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.108 2159 nu hat (MLE) 29.52 nu star (bias corrected) 21.01 2160 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.126 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.116 2161 2162 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2163 k hat (KM) 1.241 nu hat (KM) 24.82 2164 Approximate Chi Square Value (24.82, a) 14.47 Adjusted Chi Square Value (24.82, R) 13.12 2165 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.199 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.219 2166 2167 Gamma ROS Statistics using Imputed Non -Detects 2168 GROS may not be used when data set has > 50% NDs with many tied observations at multiple DLs 2169 GROS may not be used when kstar of detected data is small such as < 0.1 2170 For such situations, GROS method tends to yield inflated values of UCLs and BTVs 2171 For gamma distributed detected data, BTVs and UCLs may be computed using gamma distribution on KM estimates 2172 Minimum 0.01 Mean 0.114 2173 Maximum 0.31 Median 0.06 2174 SD 0.112 CV 0.98 2175 k hat (MLE) 1.232 k star (bias corrected MLE) 0.929 2176 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0925 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.123 2177 nu hat (MLE) 24.64 nu star (bias corrected) 18.58 2178 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.114 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.118 2179 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 2180 Approximate Chi Square Value (18.58, a) 9.812 Adjusted Chi Square Value (18.58, R) 8.725 2181 95% Gamma Approximate UCL (use when n> 50) 0.216 95% Gamma Adjusted UCL (use when n<50) 0.243 2182 2183 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 121841 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.813 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test A B C I D I E F G I H I I I J I K I L 2185 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Detected Data Not Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2186 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.283 Lilliefors GOF Test 2187 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Detected Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 21881 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2189 2190 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2191 Mean in Original Scale 0.114 Mean in Log Scale -2.607 2192 SD in Original Scale 0.111 SD in Log Scale 1.01 2193 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.179 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.172 2194 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.177 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.217 2195 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.351 2196 2197 UCLs using Lognormal Distribution and KM Estimates when Detected data are Lognormally Distributed 2198 KM Mean (logged) -2.52 95% H -UCL (KM -Log) 0.24 2199 KM SD (logged) 0.822 95% Critical H Value (KM -Log) 2.75 2200 KM Standard Error of Mean (logged) 0.276 2201 2202 DL/2 Statistics 2203 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2204 Mean in Original Scale 0.115 Mean in Log Scale -2.589 2205 SD in Original Scale 0.111 SD in Log Scale 0.975 2206 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.179 95% H -Stat UCL 0.326 2207 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2208 2209 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2210 Detected Data appear Approximate Lognormal Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2211 2212 Suggested UCL to Use 2213 95% KM (Chebyshev) UCL 0.268 2214 2215 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2216 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2217 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2218 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2219 2220 2221 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 2222 2223 General Statistics 2224 Total Number of Observations 9 Number of Distinct Observations 8 2225 Number of Missing Observations 1 2226 Minimum 0.04 Mean 0.216 2227 Maximum 0.5 Median 0.14 2228 SD 0.164 Std. Error of Mean 0.0548 2229 Coefficient of Variation 0.762 Skewness 0.96 2230 2231 Note: Sample size is small (e.g., <10), if data are collected using ISM approach, you should use 2232 guidance provided in ITRC Tech Reg Guide on ISM (ITRC, 2012) to compute statistics of interest. 2233 For example, you may want to use Chebyshev UCL to estimate EPC (ITRC, 2012). 2234 Chebyshev, UCL can be computed using the Nonparametric and All UCL Options of ProUCL 5.0 2235 122361 Normal GOF Test A B C I D I E F G H I I J K L 2237 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.865 Shapiro Wilk GOF Test 2238 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2239 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.252 Lilliefors GOF Test 2240 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2241 Data appear Normal at 5% Significance Level 2242 2243 Assuming Normal Distribution 2244 95% Normal UCL 95% UCLs (Adjusted for Skewness) 2245 95% Student's -t UCL 0.317 95% Adjusted -CLT UCL (Chen -1995) 0.324 2246 95% Modified -t UCL (Johnson -1978) 0.32 2247 2248 Gamma GOF Test 2249 A -D Test Statistic 0.286 Anderson -Darling Gamma GOF Test 2250 5% A -D Critical Value 0.73 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2251 K -S Test Statistic 0.18 Kolmogrov-Smirnoff Gamma GOF Test 2252 5% K -S Critical Value 0.283 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2253 Detected data appear Gamma Distributed at 5% Significance Level 2254 2255 Gamma Statistics 2256 k hat (MLE) 1.962 k star (bias corrected MLE) 1.382 2257 Theta hat (MLE) 0.11 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) 0.156 2258 nu hat (MLE) 35.32 nu star (bias corrected) 24.88 2259 MLE Mean (bias corrected) 0.216 MLE Sd (bias corrected) 0.183 2260 Approximate Chi Square Value (0.05) 14.52 2261 Adjusted Level of Significance 0.0231 Adjusted Chi Square Value 12.88 2262 2263 Assuming Gamma Distribution 2264 95% Approximate Gamma UCL (use when n> 50)) 0.369 95% Adjusted Gamma UCL (use when n<50) 0.416 2265 2266 Lognormal GOF Test 2267 Shapiro Wilk Test Statistic 0.963 Shapiro Wilk Lognormal GOF Test 2268 5% Shapiro Wilk Critical Value 0.829 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2269 Lilliefors Test Statistic 0.131 Lilliefors Lognormal GOF Test 2270 5% Lilliefors Critical Value 0.295 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2271 Data appear Lognormal at 5% Significance Level 2272 2273 Lognormal Statistics 2274 Minimum of Logged Data -3.219 Mean of logged Data -1.811 2275 Maximum of Logged Data -0.693 SD of logged Data 0.818 2276 2277 Assuming Lognormal Distribution 2278 95% H -UCL 0.521 90% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.402 2279 95% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.486 97.5% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.601 2280 99% Chebyshev (MVUE) UCL 0.828 2281 2282 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2283 Data appear to follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2284 2285 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCLs 2286 95% CLT UCL 0.306 95% Jackknife UCL 0.317 2287 95% Standard Bootstrap UCL 0.3 95% Bootstrap -t UCL 0.386 2288 95% Hall's Bootstrap UCL 0.355 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.301 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 DDD (p,p'-DDD) 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 DDE (p,p'-DDE) 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 C I D I E F 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.314 90% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.38 97.5% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCL 0.558 Suggested UCL to Use 95% Student's -t UCL 1 0.317 95% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCLI 0.454 99% Chebyshev(Mean, Sd) UCLI 0.761 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Singh, and laci (2002) and Singh and Singh (2003). However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets. For additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 1 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Observations 2 Number of Non -Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). The data set for variable DDD (p,p'-DDD) was not processed! General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 1 Number of Distinct Detects 1 Number of Distinct Observations 2 Number of Non -Detects 9 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 Warning: Only one distinct data value was detected! ProUCL (or any other software) should not be used on such a data set! It is suggested to use alternative site specific values determined by the Project Team to estimate environmental parameters (e.g., EPC, BTV). The data set for variable DDD, o,p'- + DDD, p,p'- was not processed! General Statistics Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Detects 2 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Minimum Detect 0.06 Maximum Detect 0.09 Variance Detects 4.5000E-4 Mean Detects 0.075 Median Detects 0.075 Skewness Detects N/A Mean of Logged Detects -2.611 Number of Distinct Observations Number of Non -Detects Number of Distinct Non -Detects Minimum Non -Detect Maximum Non -Detect Percent Non -Detects SD Detects CV Detects Kurtosis Detects SD of Logged Detects 3 8 1 0.02 0.02 80% 0.0212 0.283 N/A 0.287 A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 2341 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 2342 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 2343 2344 2345 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2346 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2347 2348 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2349 Mean 0.031 Standard Error of Mean 0.0103 2350 SD 0.023 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 2351 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0499 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2352 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0479 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 2353 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0619 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0758 2354 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0952 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.133 2355 2356 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2357 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2358 2359 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2360 k hat (MLE) 24.66 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 2361 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00304 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 2362 nu hat (MLE) 98.65 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 2363 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 2364 2365 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2366 k hat (KM) 1.817 nu hat (KM) 36.33 2367 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 23681 Approximate Chi Square Value (36.33, a) 23.54 Adjusted Chi Square Value (36.33, R) 21.76 2369 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0479 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0518 2370 2371 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 2372 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2373 23741 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2375 Mean in Original Scale 0.0282 Mean in Log Scale -3.951 2376 SD in Original Scale 0.0271 SD in Log Scale 0.923 2377 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0439 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0426 2378 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0462 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0655 2379 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.073 2380 2381 DL/2 Statistics 2382 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2383 Mean in Original Scale 0.023 Mean in Log Scale -4.206 2384 SD in Original Scale 0.0283 SD in Log Scale 0.846 2385 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0394 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0469 23861 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2387 2388 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2389 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2390 2391 Suggested UCL to Use 2392 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0499 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A A B C D I E I F I G I H I I J K L 2393 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 2394 2395 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 23961 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2397 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2398 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2399 2400 DDE, o,p'- + DDE, p,p'- 2401 2402 General Statistics 2403 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 3 2404 Number of Detects 2 Number of Non -Detects 8 2405 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 1 2406 Minimum Detect 0.06 Minimum Non -Detect 0.02 2407 Maximum Detect 0.09 Maximum Non -Detect 0.02 2408 Variance Detects 4.5000E-4 Percent Non -Detects 80% 2409 Mean Detects 0.075 SD Detects 0.0212 2410 Median Detects 0.075 CV Detects 0.283 2411 Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A 2412 Mean of Logged Detects -2.611 SD of Logged Detects 0.287 2413 2414 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 2415 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 2416 2417 2418 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2419 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2420 2421 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2422 Mean 0.031 Standard Error of Mean 0.0103 2423 SD 0.023 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A 2424 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0499 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2425 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0479 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 2426 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0619 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0758 2427 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0952 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.133 2428 2429 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2430 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2431 2432 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2433 k hat (MLE) 24.66 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 2434 Theta hat (MLE) 0.00304 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 2435 nu hat (MLE) 98.65 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 2436 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 2437 2438 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2439 k hat (KM) 1.817 nu hat (KM) 36.33 2440 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 2441 Approximate Chi Square Value (36.33, a) 23.54 Adjusted Chi Square Value (36.33, R) 21.76 2442 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0479 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0518 2443 2444 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only A B C D E I F I G I H I J K L 2445 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2446 2447 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 24481 Mean in Original Scale 0.0282 Mean in Log Scale -3.951 2449 SD in Original Scale 0.0271 SD in Log Scale 0.923 2450 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.0439 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0422 2451 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0475 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.0642 2452 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.073 2453 2454 DL/2 Statistics 2455 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2456 Mean in Original Scale 0.023 Mean in Log Scale -4.206 2457 SD in Original Scale 0.0283 SD in Log Scale 0.846 2458 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0394 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0469 2459 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2460 2461 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2462 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2463 2464 Suggested UCL to Use 2465 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0499 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2466 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 2467 2468 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 2469 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2470 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 24711 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2472 2473 DDT+ Metabolites 2474 2475 General Statistics 2476 Total Number of Observations 10 Number of Distinct Observations 4 2477 Number of Detects 2 Number of Non -Detects 8 2478 Number of Distinct Detects 2 Number of Distinct Non -Detects 2 2479 Minimum Detect 0.06 Minimum Non -Detect 0.02 2480 Maximum Detect 0.12 Maximum Non -Detect 0.03 2481 Variance Detects 0.0018 Percent Non -Detects 80% 2482 Mean Detects 0.09 SD Detects 0.0424 2483 Median Detects 0.09 CV Detects 0.471 2484 Skewness Detects N/A Kurtosis Detects N/A 2485 Mean of Logged Detects -2.467 SD of Logged Detects 0.49 2486 2487 Warning: Data set has only 2 Detected Values. 2488 This is not enough to compute meaningful or reliable statistics and estimates. 2489 2490 2491 Normal GOF Test on Detects Only 2492 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2493 2494 Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics using Normal Critical Values and other Nonparametric UCLs 2495 Mean 0.034 Standard Error of Mean 0.0139 2496 SD 0.031 95% KM (BCA) UCL N/A A B C D I E F G H I I J I K L 2497 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0595 95% KM (Percentile Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2498 95% KM (z) UCL 0.0568 95% KM Bootstrap t UCL N/A 2499 90% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0757 95% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.0945 25001 97.5% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.121 99% KM Chebyshev UCL 0.172 2501 2502 Gamma GOF Tests on Detected Observations Only 2503 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2504 2505 Gamma Statistics on Detected Data Only 2506 k hat (MLE) 8.653 k star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 2507 Theta hat (MLE) 0.0104 Theta star (bias corrected MLE) N/A 2508 nu hat (MLE) 34.61 nu star (bias corrected) N/A 2509 MLE Mean (bias corrected) N/A MLE Sd (bias corrected) N/A 2510 2511 Gamma Kaplan -Meier (KM) Statistics 2512 k hat (KM) 1.199 nu hat (KM) 23.98 2513 Adjusted Level of Significance (R) 0.0267 2514 Approximate Chi Square Value (23.98, a) 13.84 Adjusted Chi Square Value (23.98, R) 12.51 2515 95% Gamma Approximate KM -UCL (use when n> 50) 0.0589 95% Gamma Adjusted KM -UCL (use when n<50) 0.0652 2516 2517 Lognormal GOF Test on Detected Observations Only 25181 Not Enough Data to Perform GOF Test 2519 2520 Lognormal ROS Statistics Using Imputed Non -Detects 2521 Mean in Original Scale 0.0239 Mean in Log Scale -4.744 2522 SD in Original Scale 0.0381 SD in Log Scale 1.518 2523 95% t UCL (assumes normality of ROS data) 0.046 95% Percentile Bootstrap UCL 0.0447 2524 95% BCA Bootstrap UCL 0.0525 95% Bootstrap t UCL 0.129 2525 95% H -UCL (Log ROS) 0.236 2526 2527 DL/2 Statistics 2528 DL/2 Normal DL/2 Log -Transformed 2529 Mean in Original Scale 0.0265 Mean in Log Scale -4.137 25301 SD in Original Scale 0.0364 SD in Log Scale 0.904 2531 95% t UCL (Assumes normality) 0.0476 95% H -Stat UCL 0.0578 2532 DL/2 is not a recommended method, provided for comparisons and historical reasons 2533 2534 Nonparametric Distribution Free UCL Statistics 2535 Data do not follow a Discernible Distribution at 5% Significance Level 2536 2537 Suggested UCL to Use 2538 95% KM (t) UCL 0.0595 95% KM (% Bootstrap) UCL N/A 2539 Warning: One or more Recommended UCL(s) not available! 2540 2541 Note: Suggestions regarding the selection of a 95% UCL are provided to help the user to select the most appropriate 95% UCL. 25421 Recommendations are based upon data size, data distribution, and skewness. 2543 These recommendations are based upon the results of the simulation studies summarized in Singh, Maichle, and Lee (2006). 2544 However, simulations results will not cover all Real World data sets; for additional insight the user may want to consult a statistician. 2545