[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
IFY1992 FINALPRODUCT Task19 Bioaccum. Initiative- Phase III VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY'S CBIOACCUMULATION INITIATIVE IN THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AREA. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY'S CBIOACCUMULATION INITIATIVE IN THE COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AREA. SUBMITTED BY OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND STANDARDS 4900 COX ROAD RICHMOND, VA 23230 DECEMBER 1993 (S@ (110 This study was funded, in part, by the Virginia Council on the Environment.'s Coastal Resources Management Program through Grant #NA270ZO312-01 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ,Administration, office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, "I've under Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 as amended. Table of Contents Introduction ..................................................... Methods .......................................................... Results ........................................................... Discussion .................................... ...... Summary ...................................... ................. Conclusions ....................................................... Literature cited .................................................. List of Tables Table 1 Stations sampled under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratable compounds in the Coastal Zonae Management area of Virginia ............................................... Table 2 Frequency of occurrence, as umber of observations, of compounds detected in effluent, water, sediment, tissue, and soil under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratable compounds in the Coastal Zone Management Area of Virginia ...................... Table 3 Compounds detected in water (w, ambient or effluent), sediment (s), tissue (t) and soil (1) samples collected under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratable compounds in the Coastal Zone Management area of Virginia. Detections are reported by facility group; Table 1 lists sampling stations within each group, and site maps are in Appendix A ............................................. Table 4 Maximum concentrations in each facility group compared with standards and criteria for compounds detected in water (effluent or ambient), sediment, soil, and tissue samples collected under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratable compounds in the Coastal Zone Management are of Virginia. Asterisk beneath criteria indicates exceedance. List of Figures 0 P, No " Appendices A. Sample analytical data and sampling station maps. B. Compound evaluation criteria and standards. C. Quality control and quality assurance data. Acknowledgements This report results from the cooperative efforts of individuals at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. offices contributing to the project included: 1) the Office of Environmental Research and Standards (OERS-Water Division); 2) the Tidewater, Piedmont, and Northern Regional Offices (TRO, PRO, NRO); 3) the Federal Facilities Group (FFG-Waste Division); and 4) the office of Enforcement and Compliance Auditing (OECA- Water Division); The principal investigator and author of this study was David Grimes (OERS). The data manager for the project was M. Eileen Rowan (OERS) who was assisted by Derek Tiffany (OERS). Study field personnel included: David Grimes (OERS), M. Eileen Rowan (OERS), Christopher Collins (OERS), James Grandstaff (OERS), Wick Harlan (TRO), Tony Silvia (TRO), Roger Everton (TRO), Paul Woodward (OERS), andLisa Ellis (FFG). The review efforts of Durwood Willis (OERS), Rick Browder (OERS), M. Eileen Rowan (OERS), and Jocelyn Johnson (Spectralytix) contributed substantially to the study and are gratefully acknowledged. Introduction DRAFT In 1983 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) articulated the concept of using risk assessment in its decision making process regarding criteria guidance (Yosie 1993). EPA's adoption of the risk assessment concept brought about a need for regulatory agencies to move beyond the relating of water quality criteria to acute and chronic toxicity to integrating water quality criteria with long term human health and ecological risk effects. In 1987, after the directions of EPA's initiative were clarified and sufficient guidance became available for risk investigations, the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ) Bioaccumulation Initiative (BI) was initiated. Initiative goals centered on: 1) assessing the prevalence of bioconcentratable compounds in Virginia's surface water environment; 2) determining exposure routes for the uptake of bioconcentratable compounds by human and wildlife populations; 3) assessing human health and ecological risks associated with specific exposure scenarios, and 4) assessing and inventorying monitoring protocols for use in Virginia's NPDES program. Studies performed under the DEQ BI have been conducted using a three phase approach. The three phases consist of: 1) a effluent/water "log P11 screen; 2) a detailed gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GC-MS) investigation of effluents/waters showing high numbers of log P peaks greater than 3.5; and 3) a detailed GC-MS investigation of the sediments and biota at sites with the greatest number of bioconcentratable compounds. Using this approach the DEQ BI has screened over 200 sites in Virginia for the presence of bioconcentratable compounds in discharges and ambient waters. Of these, approximately 50 sites have been investigated through phase III. Results from past BI studies have led to modifications of the BI's three phase study design. As an alternative to phase 1 log P screens, other existing site information can be used to rank sites for study under the BI. These information sources include: 1) DEQ permit file descriptions of facility processes; 2) Federal, State, and local -,file descriptions of previous site studies; 3) DEQ regional office files and personnel; and.4) DEQ enforcement files. In October 1992, DEQ1s Office of Environmental Research and Standards (OERS) initiated BI studies of 12 sites in the Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Area of Virginia. The objective of the 1992 CZM BI studies was to assess the human health and ecological risks associated with the consumption of water, fish and shellfish from selected CZM Area receiving streams. Secondary objectives included:.1) the assessment and refinement of BI sampling methodologies, target species selection, and other BI monitoring protocols for CZM Area sites; and 2) the assessment of contract laboratory abilities to detect and quantify bioconcentratable compounds. Methods Site selection: AFT Due to the one year time constraint on the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ) Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Area Bioaccumulation Initiative (BI) studies, a canvassing of existing site data was performed for the study's first phase in place of the alternative log P field screens. Data examined during the site selection phase included: -Department of Defense Installation Restoration Program reports on Federal Facilities -DEQ-Waste Division's Federal Facility files -EPA Superfund Program CERCLIS dictionary (3.0) -DEQ-Water Division's Northern, Piedmont, and Tidewater Regional office files -DEQ BI phase I and II files -DEQ-Office of Environmental Compliance and Auditing files -DEQ Virginia Toxics Database Criteria for designating a site or facility as a potential study site included: -Documentation of the release, or potential release, of bioconcentratable compounds -Documentation of site activities involving bioconcentratable compounds -Re-occurring effluent toxicity for unknown reasons and/or unresolved toxics issues -log P peaks above 3.5. -Unresolved compliance issues -Continuing occurrence of pollution incidents involving bioconcentratable compounds -DEQ-Water Division Regional Office, Waste Division, or Office of Enforcement recommendation The proposed list of study sites was then circulated throughout DEQ for comments and prioritization. A final list of study sites was created in response to the solicited comments and the study's funding limitations. SamTAinq: Effluent and Ambient Water: All sites on the final study list were included for sampling in phase II of the CZM study. Phase II consisted of collecting effluent/water samples for a detailed GC-MS analysis of the compounds present in the sample. The objective of phase II sampling was to determine if any of the study sites were actively discharging or releasing bioconcentratabl e compounds. S GVR A F T: documented as discharging or releasing compounds of concern (Appendix B) were given the highest priority for follow up study in phase III of the CZM study. Samples collected from continuous discharges were 1 liter, 24 hour composite samples split from the facility's VPDES permit sample. Samples collected from intermittent discharges or stormwater runoff were 1-liter grab samples. Samples were collected using 10%@ HC1 - acetone stripped, stainless steel, glass, or Teflon sampling equipment. Effluent/water samples were collected into stripped glass jars with Teflon lined lids. Collected samples were stored at 40C. Effluent samples were extracted within seven days of collection. Effluent sample extracts were analyzed within 40 days. Sediment and Tissue: The eight phase II sites discharging or releasing bioconcentratable compounds of concern, or discharging high numbers of bioconcentratable compounds, were selected for phase III sampling. The phase III sampling objective was to collect a minimum of two tissue samples from indigenous organisms and 1 sediment sample from each of the eight sites. Sediment collections focused on areas of silt and clay deposits. Sediment samples were collected using Ekman dredges or stainless steel scoops which had been stripped with 10% HC1 and acetone. Sediment samples were collected from surficial layers.only, into stripped stainless steel buckets and then transferred to stripped glass jars with Teflon lined lids. Whenever possible, species collected included a bottom oriented fish or shellfish, a pelagic fish, and a game fish. Indigenous organisms were collected using electro-fishing, gill netting, seining, dredging, and manual capture techniques. Collected organisms were wrapped in aluminum foil, dull side toward sample, by species and station. Sediment and tissue samples were stored on ice during transport to the DEQ-OERS laboratory. Samples were stored at the DEQ-OERS laboratory at -20'C until processing and delivery to the analytical laboratory. Processed samples were transported to the analytical laboratory in pre-chilled coolers and were stored at the analytical laboratory at -200C until analyzed. Tissue samples were processed as either whole organisms, or as edible tissues separated from remaining tissues (Appendix A). Tissue samples were processed by homogenizing partially-thawed tissues in stainless steel blenders or food processors. All equipment used in sample processing was stripped with 100-. HC1 and DRAFT acetone between samples. Processed tissue samples were transferred to 100-1@ HC1 - acetone stripped glass jars with teflon lids.. No post collection processing of sediment samples was done. All tissue and sediment samples were extracted within 60 days of collection and analyzed within 30 days of extraction. Sample Analysis and Reportincr: General: All effluent, sediment, and tissue samples were analyzed by Spectralytix of Gaithersburg, Maryland. Approximately 25*-o of the samples were split with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science for quality assurance. The semi-volatile, extractable, and halogenated organic compounds in the CZM BI effluent/water, sediment, and tissue samples were extracted and analyzed using gas chromatography with mass spectrometry or electron capture detection (GC-MS, GC-ECD). All chromatographic peaks were reverse-searched against the National Bureau of Standards mass spectral library (NBS 19XX, Super INCOS v 6.5 - Finnegan). Spectra with fits of 70*-. or greater were considered tentatively- identified. For tentatively identified spectra the five best identifications were further analyzed for spectral purity. The single spectra with the highest fit and purity (with fit dominating over purity) was reported as the compound identification. Computer-generated identifications were then confirmed by the project analyst. Confirmed identifications were reported with percent fit values, CAS number, GC retention time, concentration, and relative retention index (VIMS 1991). Spectra with fits of less than 70% were reported as unknown. Unknown compounds were reported with the relative retention index and concentration. Analytical data summaries were reported in hard copy. Full analytical data reports were reported digitally for storage in the DEQ-OERS Virginia Toxics Database (VTDB). Effluent/Water: Separatory funnel extraction, acid-base-neutral fractionation, and surrogate spiking followed the VIMS' Analytical Protocol for Hazardous Organic Chemicals in Environmental Samiples@(VIMS 1991). The entire one-liter of sample was extracted. Identification and quantification of sample compounds were accomplished with GC-ECD and GC-MS following: 1) EPA method 8100 (via 8270) for analysis of polyaromatic hydrocarbons and tentatively-identified compounds (TICs, quantified assuming a response factor of 1); and 2) EPA method 8080 for analysis of halogenated organics (GC-ECD used for pesticides and PCBs). DRAFT Sediment: Moisture content, total organic carbon (TOC), total acid volatile sulfide (AVS), and grain size were determined for all sediment samples using the EPA Contract Laboratory Procedures Scope Of Work (EPA CLP SOW, EPA 1990), EPA 415.1 (EPA as appended), EPA Draft Method for determination of Acid Volatile Sulfides (EPA 1991), and ASTM D422-63 (ASTM 1990) methods respectively. All sediment data were reported on a dry weight basis. Sediment samples were lyophilized and extracted following the VIMS' Analytical Protocol for Hazardous organic Chemicals in Environmental Samples (VIMS 1991). Extracted samples were cleaned using gel permeation chromatography followed by silica gel column chromatography. The extract fraction containing the halogenated organics was subjected to fluorosil cleanup following EPA method 3620. Identification and quantification of sample compounds were accomplished using methods described for effluent/water samples. Tissue: Moisture and total lipid content were determined for all tissue samples using the EPA CLP SOW (1990) and gravimetric analysis methods respectively. All tissue data were reported on a wet weight basis. Tissue sample extraction and clean-up were accomplished using methods described for sediment samples. Identification and quantification of extracted sample compounds were accomplished using methods described for effluent/water samples. Analytical Quality Control: General: All organic analysis samples were spiked with surrogate standards to assess extraction recoveries. Matrix spikes were used to assess detection responses. The GC-MS and GC-ECD were calibrated using a three point initial calibration curve which was confirmed daily with a single point calibration, as recommended by the EPA 600/8000 series methods and CLP SOW. Every 12 hours or 10 samples, whichever came first, decafluorotriphenyl phosphine (DFTPP) was run for a spectrum validation test. If the criteria specified (40 CFR 136, Appendix A, method 625) were met, then analyses continued. If these criteria were not satisfied, sample analyses were sto pped until the problem was corrected and the system shown to be working properly.. DRAFT Effluent/water: In addition to the quality control steps generally described above, distilled water method blanks were extracted and analyzed with each batch of samples. Sediment: Sample duplicates were run for moisture content determinations. Analytical performance for Acid Volatile Sulfides (AVS), analyses was checked through the daily analysis of method blanks and spiked method blanks. Sample duplicates and matrix spikes were also included with each batch of AVS analyses to assess recovery rates. Total Organic Carbon (TOC) quality control included method blanks and matrix spikes. Grain size analyses were run on single samples without quality controls. In addition to the quality control steps generally described above for organic analyses, sodium sulfate method blanks were extracted and analyzed for each batch of sediment samples. Tissue: Sample blanks were run for percent lipid determinations. Additional tissue sample quality controls followed those described for sediment samples. Data Analyses: The overall prevalence of bioconcentratable compounds in Virginia's CZM area was assessed using a frequency distribution analysis. Analyses determined-the number of occurrences of a particular compound in effluent/water, sediment, soil, and tissue matrices. Regional and site specific exposure routes were determined using station specific frequency distribution analyses. Analyses determined if compounds were partitioning through all sampled matrices, or concentrating in specific matrices. Human health and environmental risks were assessed by comparing sample contaminant concentrations to risk-based State and Federal standards and criteria (Appendix B). The order of magnitude by which a standard or criteria was exceeded was used to estimate the risk associated with the exceedance. Non-risk-based assessment criteria were also included in comparative analyses when risk-based criteria were unavailable or non-risk-based criteria represented legally enforceable contamination limits. Effluent/water data were screened against: 1) Virginia water quality standards (VWQS) (Virginia Water Control Board 1992); 2) EPA 304(a) criteria (EPA 1991); 3) EPA Compounds of Concern (EPA 1993); 4) EPA Region III Risk Based Concentrations (RBC) DRAFT (EPA 111 1993); 5) Compound information from the EPA IRIS database .(EPA 1993), the National Library of Medicine's MEDLARS databases (National Library of Medicine 1993), and the Numerica databases (Technical Database Services 1993) (Appendix B); and 6) Existing Recieving Stream Characterization Reports (Federal Facility Installation Restoration Program (IRP) reports, Bioaccummulation Initiative site files, Toxicity Reduction Evaluation files) Soil data were screened against: 1) EPA Compounds of Concern; 2) EPA 304(a) criteria; 3) EPA RBC; and 4) Compound information from the IRIS, MEDLARS, and Numerica databases. Sediment data were screened against: 1) EPA Compounds of Concern; 2) EPA 304(a) criteria; 3) EPA RBC; 4) Compound information from the IRIS, MEDLARS, and Numerica databases; 5) Draft EPA sediment criteria; and 2) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Status and Trends Data (NOAA 1991). - Tissue data were screened against: 1) EPA Compounds of Concern; 2) EPA 304(a) criteria; 3) EPA RBC; 4) Compound information from the IRIS, MEDLARS, and Numerica databases; 5) U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Action Levels, Tolerances and Other values for Poisonous or Deleterious Substances in Seafood (FDA 1988); and 6) Virginia Draft Screening Values for Fish Tissue Contaminants (DEQ 1992). Analytical Quality Assurance: Previous DEQ BI studies have found laboratory capabilities for achieving the detection and quantitation limits required in the analysis of bioconcentratable compounds (.!@ 1 ppb) to be highly variable. The demonstrated ability to achieve the required detection levels was a critical factor in the laboratory selection process of the CZM BI study. The DEQ Invitation for Bid for analytical services, related to the CZM BI study, required bidders.to submit documentation demonstrating the bidder's ability to achieve the required detection limits and to meet specified quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) requirements. The QA/QC requirements for the DEQ BI study were those set forth in the EPA 600 and 8000 series methods (EPA 1990), and the EPA CLP. To ensure acceptable levels of detection and quantitation were being met, seven CZM BI study phase II effluent samples, six DEQ BI sediment., and 17 DEQ BI tissue samples were split between Spectralytix and the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS). In previous DEQ BI studies, VIMS has demonstrated the ability to a:chieve the required detection and quantitation levels on a consistent basis. Assessment of Spectralytix's performance was made by comparing Spectralytix's number of detected, identified, halogenated compounds, and quantitation of these compounds, to VIMS data for the quality assurance split samples. DRAFT In addition to the above quality assurance steps, Spectralytix was required to provide a confidence ranking for each identification reported. The confidence ranking system was based on a scale of 0 - 3, using the following definitions: 0 The compound is unknown. Neither the retention time or mass spectra match with any compounds in the NBS library. 1 The compound is tentatively identified. One component (retention time or mass spectra) matches with a compound in the NBS library. 2. The compound is confirmed. Both the retention time and the mass spectra correlate to a single compound in the NBS library. 3 The compound is confirmed. The retention time and the mass spectra are matched against the compound's standard. Results DRAFT. Site selection The initial list of candidate sites for the CZM BI study contained 61 sites. Review and pricritization of these sites resulted in the final selection of 12 sites (table 1). The site selection process distributed the final sites among DEQ's CZM Area regions (Figure 1) as.follows: 1) The three sites in the DEQ-Northern Region (NR) consisted of three Federal Facilities; 2) The two sites in the DEQ-Piedmont Region (PR) consisted of one Federal Facility and one private industry; and 3) The seven sites in the DEQ-Tidewater Region (TR) consisted of three Federal Facilities, three private industries, and one Sewage Treatment Plant (STP). The number of sampling locations within the CZM BI study sites ranged widely (table 1). The number of sampling locations established within each site was governed by three factors: 1) the number of known or suspected areas of contamination at the site; 2) the known or suspected extent of off site migration of contaminants from a particular site; and 3) the budgetary limitations of the CZM BI study. Sampling locations at each site were grouped (Table 1) for matrix correlation analyses. Groups consisted of locations which were spatially associated with a known or suspected contamination source. Site maps showing sample locations and sample location groupings are presented in Appendix A. Analytic 1 results All CZM BI study analytical results are reported in Appendix A. Data for the CZM BI-study Quality Control and Quality Assurance are reported separately in Appendix C. Effluent and Ambient Water: 1) Under phase II of the CZM BI study a total of 49 effluent/water samples were collected for analysis. The 49 phase II samples consisted of 26 effluent samples and 23 ambient water samples. 2) Phase II data from four of the 12 study sites removed the sites from the CZM BI study's phase III candidate list. Analyses of phase II samples from Fort A.P. Hill - APH-Gl-G6 (6), and NASA Goddard - NSG-G1 (1) indicated no compounds were being discharged or released into CZM Area waters in concentrations greater than 1 ppb (1 ppb = detection level). Analyses of phase II samples from Chesapeake Corporation - CC-G1 (1) indicated 4-ethyl-1,3-benzenediol (4S ppb), decamethyl- cyclopentasiloxane (38 ppb), and phthalic acid esters (up to 120 DRAff, ppb) were being discharged. The two phthalic acid esters identified in the Chesapeake Corporation discharge are listed on the Federal Priority Pollutant list (EPA 19XX) and one is listed as a known carcinogen in the Numerica database QSAR (TDS 19XX). However, the bioconcentration factors (BCF) for these two compounds are relatively low. Therefore, the compounds would not be expected to readily partition into sediments and tissues. Analyses of phase II samples from the Quantico Marine Base - QM-G1 indicated alcohol (17 ppb) and esters (3 ppb) were being .discharged. Analyses of internal samples (QM360) indicated a potential for the discharge of benzene based compounds, and trimethyl hexane. None of the compounds in the Quantico Marine Base 060 discharge are on the effluent/water screening lists. No existing receiving stream characterization reports were found for the Fort A.P. Hill sites. Existing receiving stream characterization reports for the Chesapeake, NASA, and Quantico sites indicated that sediment and tissue characterizations had either been done previously or were being addressed. The phase II sample results, available compound information, and existing receiving stream characterization reports, did not justify including these four sites on the CZM BI phase III candidate list. Therefore, these sites were not included in the CZM BI phase III studies. 3) Phase II data from five of the 12 study sites resulted in the sites being selected for further study under phase III of the CZM BI study. Analyses indicated compounds on one or more of the effluent/water screening lists were being discharged or released from these sites. The five sites, number of samples per site, compounds of concern at each site, and maximum compound concentrations (ppb) were: Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare Center - DA-G2 (DASTP001), 1, Lindane, 0.12, Endrin, 0.21, Methoxychlor, 2.3, Heptachlor, 0.38, and Heptachlor epoxide, 0.20; Driver Naval Radio Station - DRI-Gl (DR1001), 5, PCBs, 10; Hampton Roads Sanitation District (HRSD) - Nansemond Point STP - HN-Gl (HN001), 1, alpha-BHC 0.02 (estimated), gamma-BHC (Lindane), 0.02 (estimated); New Church Energy - NCE-G1 (NCE001), 1, PCBs, 0.14 (estimated); Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF-Gi (WRF10), PCBs, 15, diethyl ester phthalic acid, 9; WRF-G2 (WRF08), 3, PCBs, 1.5. Existing receiving stream characterization reports for the Dahlgren and Driver sites indicated that sediment and tissue characterizations had either been done previously or were being addressed. However, the sites were selected for further study DRA". under phase III of the CZM BI study. The characterization work at Driver had been done prior to the removal of a PCB contaminated site, and the characterization work at Dahlgren had not been initiated. The goal of the phase III work at Driver was to assess the effectiveness of the removal action. The goal of the phase III work at Dahlgren was to screen for human health and environmental risks in a time appropriate response to the phase II data. @ Available reports for the HRSD sit e indicated that some sediment characterization work had been done. However, the reports did not indicate that tissue characterizations had been done or were planned to be done. Therefore, this site was selected for further study under phase III of the CZM BI. Available reports for the New Church and Woodbridge sites did not indicate that sediment and tissue characterizations had been done. The reports also did not indicate that these characterizations were planned to be done. 4) Phase II data from three of the 12 study sites did not indicate the discharge or release of compounds on the effluent/water screening list. However, the sites were selected for further study under phase III of the CZM BI for other reasons. The Allied Colloids site was selected for further study due to the record of calls to the DEQ Tidewater Regional Office about suspected toxics problems with the facility's stormwater runoff.. No reports were found indicating that sediment and tissues had been characterized in the receiving stream or that such characterizations were planned. The Boykins Narrow Fabrics site was selected for further study due to DEQ-Regional and DEQ-Office of Enforcement and Compliance Auditing concerns about potential long term impacts from compounds seeping into CZM area waters from the site's unlined treatment ponds. No reports were found indicating that sediment and tissues had been characterized in the receiving stream or that such characterizations were planned. Phase III studies also sampled one background location at this site (BNF-G2). The Yorktown Naval Weapons Station NWS-Gl site was selected for .further study due to reported and observed contamination of the site. The site had been used as a landfill for a variety of materials, much of which was unknown. Phase II observations noted the presence of old practice bombs at NWS06 and what were reported to be old torpedo batteries in the NWSOG receiving stream. Phase II observations noted the presence of old fire fighting equipment at NWS07. No reports were found indicating that sediment and tissues had been characterized in the receiving stream or that such characterizations were planned. Sediment/soil: DRAFT 1) Under phase III of the CZM BI study 69 sediment/soil samples were collected for analysis from eight sites. The samples consisted of 61 sediment samples and 8 soil samples. Soil samples were collected at the Woodbridge Research Facility WRF-G1 (WRF04) site only. Surface soil samples were collected at this site due to the Phase II data showing an active release of PCBs, and the general lack of information as to potential sources. 2) All Phase III sediment/soil samples contained compounds on the sediment/soil screening lists. The eight sites, number of samples per site, compounds of concern at each site, and maximum compound concentrations (ppb) were: Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare Center - DA-G2 (DA4-5), 8, Anthracene, 76; PCBs, 157; Benz[a]anthracene, 48; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 59; Benzo[klfluoranthene, 73; Benzo[ghilperylene, 130; Benzo[ajpyrene, 38; Chlordane, 7; Chrysene, 320; DDD, 320; DDE, 120; DDT, 31; Dibenz(a,h)anthracene, 39; Dieldrin, 60; Fluoranthene, 68; Fluorene, 28; Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, 16; Napthalene, 14; Phenanthrene, 280; Pyrene, 59. The DA-G2 site includes a drainage swale which originates in the vicinity of the Dahlgren IRP Pesticide Rinse Area site. Due to the presence of pesticides in the DASTP001 phase II sample, two of the DA-G2 sediment samples were collected in the pesticide rinse area drainage swale; Driver Naval Radio Station - DRI-G1 (DR11-8), 9, PCBs, 4330; Benz(alanthracene, 54; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 160; Benzo[klfluoranthene, 53; Benzo[ghi]perylene, 49; Benzo[alpyrene, 63; Chrysene, 100; Fluoranthene, 180; Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, 42; Phenanthrene, 35; and Pyrene, 140; HRSD - Nansemond Point STP - HN-G1 (HNI-7), 6, Anthracene, 28; PCBs, 71; Benz[alanthracene, 130; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 280; Benzo[klfluoranthene, 87; Benzo[ghilperylene, 60; Benzo[alpyrene, 150; Chrysene, 140; Fluoranthene, 190; Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, Maneb, 48; Phenanthrene, 78; and Pyrene, 240; New Church Energy - NCE-G1 (NCE2-5, 301), 5, Anthracene, 17; Chrysene, 30; DDE, 12; DDT, 1; Fluoranthene, 24; Napthalene, 12; Phenanthrene, 41; Pyrene, 16. Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF-Gl (WRF04, soil), 8, Acenaphthene, 140; Acenaphthylene, 18; Anthracene, 180; PCBs, 1100; Benz[al.anthracene, 660; delta-BHC, 2; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 1100; Benzo[klfluoranthene, 300; Benzo[ghilperylene, 160; Benzo[alpyrene, 530; Chlordane, 3; Chrysene, 600; DDD, 0.5; DDE, 6,; DDT, 4; Dibenz(a,h)anthracene, 160; Endosulfan sulfate, 0.3; Fluoranthene, 1200; Fluorene, 93; Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, 530; Napthalene, 32; Phenanthrene, 950; Pyrene, 1000; WRF-Gl (WRF03), 8, PCBs, 39; Benz[ajanthracene, 170; beta-BHC, 0.6; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 400; Benzo(k1fluoranthene, 120; D R A Benzo[ghilperylene, 190; Benzo[alpyrene, 250; Chlordane, 2; Chrysene, 180; DDD, 2; DDE, 1; DDT, 1; Dibenz(a,h)anthracene, 41; Dieldrin, 0.4; Endosulfan (I, II, sulfate), 1; Endrin (aldehyde), 1; Fluoranthene, 110; Heptachlor epoxide, 0.1; Indeno(1,2,3- cd)pyrene, 190; Phenanthrene, 35; Pyrene, 140; WRF-G2 (WRF08), 4, PCBs, 96000; Benz[alanthracene, 120; Benzo[blfluoranthene', 380; Benzo[klfluoranthene, 55; Benzo[alpyrene, 190; Chrysene, 140; Fluoranthene, 46; Phenanthrene, 94; Pyrene, 230. Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF-G1 (BNF1-2, 4-5, x-trib and below Tarrara Creek Confluence), 4, PCBs, 219; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 65; Chrysene, 37; DDE, 8.1; Dieldrin, 4.7; Fluoranthene, 27; Pyrene, 33; BNF-G2 (BNF3, above Tarrara Creek Confluence), 1, DDD, 0.6. Allied Colloids - ACL-G1 (ACL1-3), 4, Aldrin, 3; PCBs, 40; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 105; Chlordane 39; DDD, 5; DDE, 3; DDT, 9.5 Dieldrin, 1.4; Endosulfan 1, 2.6; Fluoranthene, 125; Heptachlor epoxide, 3; Pyrene, 47. Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS-Gl (NWS06-07), 12, Anthracene, 22; PCBs, 270; Benz[alanthracene, 180; Benzo[blfluoranthene, 360; Benzo[klfluoranthene, 140; Benzo[ghilperylene, 270; Benzo[a]pyrene, 280; Chlordane, 10; Chrysene, 260; DDD, 19; DDE, 11; DDT, 13; Dibenz(a,h)anthracene, 38; Fluoranthene, 330; Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, 200; Phenanthrene, 130; Pyrene, 300., Tissue: 1) Under phase III of the CZM BI study a total of 47'tissue samples were collected for analysis from eight sites. 2) All Phase III tissue samples contained compounds on the tissue screening lists. The eight sites, number of samples per site, compounds of concern at each site, and maximum compound concentrations (ppb) were: Dahlgren Naval Surface Warfare Center - DA-G2 (DA5), 6, PCBs, 440; Chlordane, 4; DDD, 7; DDE, 20; Dieldrin, 1; Endrin, 5.3; Driver Naval Radio Station - DRI-Gl (DRIS, 8), 4, PCBs, 28024; DDE, 3.4; HRSD - Nansemond Point STP - HN-G1 (HN1, 7), 5, PCBs, 39; Chlordane, 3.2;,DDD, 0.6; DDE, 12.9; New Church Energy - NCE-Gl (NCE2-5, 301), 2, PCBs, 16; gama-BHC, 0.8; Chlordane, 2.7; DDD, 4; DDE, 12; Heptachlor, 0.5; Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF-Gl (WRF03), 14, PCBs, 1500; Benzo[alpyrene, 140; Chlordane, 24; DDD, 27; DDE, 97; DDT, 2; Dieldrin, 3; Endrin (aldehyde), 29; DRAH4 Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF-GI (BNF4-5, x-trib and belowi.Tarrara Creek Confluence), 10, PCBs, 7; DDD, 7; DDE, 26; DDT, 1; Allied Colloids - ACL-Gl (ACL3), 3, PCBs, 13; DDD, 1; DDE, 4; DDT, 1; Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS-Gl (NWS06-07), 3, PCBs, 18; Chlordane, 7; DDD, 37; DDE, 3; DDT, 5; Phthalic acid, diethyl ester, 14000. Ouality control: All CZM BI study Quality Control (QC) data are reported in Appendix C. Sample quality control identifier information is also reported in Appendix C. Effluent: Detection levels reported for effluent organic analyses were O.OS-1.0 ppb. The detection level reported for Toxaphene was 5.0 ppb- 1) Surrogate recoveries - all surrogate recoveries were within QC limits (QCL) except the following: Surrogate 1 (S1 - 1,1-Binaphthyl): Allied Colloids ACLOO1 (above QCL), Blank (above QCL) Fort A.P. Hill Blank (above QCL) Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03 (below QCL) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS06 (above QC1), NWS07 (above QCL) Surrogate 2 (S2 - Perinapthenone): Allied Colloids - Blank (above QCL) Dahlgren - DASTPOO1, DA3 (above.QCL) Fort A.P. Hill - Blank (above QCL) HRSD - HN001 (below QCL) Quantico - QMOGO (above QCL) Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03 (below QCL) Surrogate 3 (S3 - Tribromophenol): Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF04 (below QCL) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS01 (above QCL), NWSOS (above QCL), NWS08 (above QCL), NWS10 (above QCL) Surrogate 4 (S4 - Decachlorobiphenyl): New Church Energy - NCE001 (below QCL) Quantico - QM360 (below QCL) .2) Matrix spikes - An organochlorine pesticide-PCB matrix spike is reported for HRSD sample HN001, and semi-volatile organics matrix spikes are reported for HN001 and DRIO01. All.other DRAU, sample volumes were used for analyses which precluded matrix spiking. Therefore, method blank spikes were run for effluent quality control matrix spikes. Pesticide-PCB matrix spike results from HN001 indicate all matrix spikes were detected at levels within the Quality Contr6l Limits (40-1310-.). Only the 4,41-DDT spike had an actual recovery greater than 1000-. (1060-0. Semi-volatile matrix spike results for HN001 report spike recoveries of 36-760-.. Duplicate matrix spike results for HN001 report spike recoveries of 44-8901. The relative percent d@fferences between the HN001 spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were S.1-460-.. Semi-volatile matrix spike results for DRIO01 report spike recoveries.of Go- 820-a. Duplicate matrix spike results for DRIO01 report spike recoveries of 39-92*-o. The relative percent differences between the DRIO01 spike recoveries were 4.9-S7%. 3) Matrix blanks - all effluent matrix blanks had non-detectable levels of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons and Compounds of Concern. Sediment/soil: Detection levels reported for sediment organic analyses were O.OS-0.5 ppb for halogenated compounds and 10.0 ppb for semi- volatile compounds. All compound concentrations are reported on a dry weight basis. Inorganic Analyses: 1) Percent moisture: a) duplicates - The relative percent difference between sample percent moistures and duplicate sample percent moistures was 0.4-6.00-o. 2) Acid Volatile Sulfides: a) blanks - All-AVS blanks had non-detectable levels of AVS. b) duplicates - the relative percent differences between sample AVS values and duplicate sample AVS values were 0-4.3%. c) spiked blanks - Recoveries for blank AVS spikes were 87.5-89.8t. d) matrix spikes - Recoveries for matrix AVS spikes were 87.7-104t. 3) Total Organic Carbon: a) blanks - All TOC blanks had non-detectable levels of TOC. matrix spikes - Recoveries for matrix TOC spikes were 90- 96%. Recoveries for-duplicate matrix TOC spikes were 89-9401. Organic Analyses: 1) Surrogate recoveries - all surrogate recoveries were within QC limits (QCL) except the following: Surrogate 1 DRA".. (S1 - 1,1-Binaphthyl): Allied Colloids - ACL1 (blank below QCL) Driver - DR16 (above QCL) HRSD - HN5 (blank below QCL) New Church Energy - NCE301 (blank below QCL) Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF04A (below QCL), WRF04F (sample above QCL, blank below QCL), WRF08D (blank below QCL) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS06A (blank below QCLO, NWS06C (below QCL), NWS06F (blank below QCL), NWS07B (blank below QCL), NWS07C (blank below QCL), NWS07F (blank below QCL) Surrogate 2 ("S2 - Perinapthenone): Allied Colloids - ACL1 (above QCL), ACL2 (below QCL), ACL3A-B (below QCL). Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF1-3 (blank below QCL), BNF5 (blank below QCL). Dahlgren - DA4B (below QCL), DA5B (below QCL), DA5C (below QCL). Driver - DRI1 (blank below QCL), DR14 (blank below QCL), DRI5 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL), DR16 (blank below QCL), DR17 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL), DRI8A (below QCL). Woodbrdige Research Facility - WRF03A-D (duplicate blank above QCL), WRF04A (below QCL), WRF04D-E (duplicate blank above QCL), WRF04G-H (duplicate blank above QCL). HRSD - HN3 (Above QCL), HN5 (above QCL), HN6 (below QCL). Surrogate 3 (S3 - Tribromophenol): Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF1-3 (blank below QCL), BNF4 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL), BNF5 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL). Dahlgren - DA4A (below QCL), DA4D (below QCL), DA5C (below QCL), DASE (below QCL). Driver - DRI1 (sample above QCL, blank below QCL), DR14 (blank below QCL), DR15 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL), DR16 (blank below QCL), DR17 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL), DRISA*(below QCL), DRI8B (below QCL). Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03G (above.QCL), WRF04A (below QCL). HRSD - HN2-3 (blank below QCL), HN4 (sample below QCL, blank below QCL). Surrogate 4 (S4 - Decachlorobiphenyl): Allied Colloids - ACL2 (above QCL), ACL3A-B (above QCL). Dahlgren - DA5E (above QCL). Driver - DR18B (below QCL). Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF04A (below QCL), WRF04F (above QCL), WRF04G (below QCL). HRSD - HN4 (below QCL), HN6 (above QCL). Vow 2) Matrix Spikes: DRAr r A) Blank matrix spikes: Pesticide-PCB blank matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 0-100%. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 0- 50*-.. Semi-volatile matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 0-8001. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 5.1-14701. B) Matrix spikes: Pesticide-PCE matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 0-106%. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 42-156%. Samples with associated matrix spikes with greater than 100% recovery were: 1) HRSD - HN1. Compounds with recoveries above 100 percent were: 1) PCB (106%). Semi-volatile matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 5- 1950-.. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 5.9-135%. Samples with associated matrix spikes with greater than 100@; recovery were: 1) Dahlgren - DA4B, DA5C; and 2) Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF4. Compounds with recoveries above 100 percent in the Dahlgren associated matrix spike were: 1) Benzo(b)fluoranthene (113*-.); 2) Benzo(k)fluoranthene (118%); 3) Benzo(a)pyrene (123-*.); 4) Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (105-1950-.); 4) Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (1349k); 5) Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (120-'.). Compounds with recoveries above 100 percent in the Boykins Narrow Fabrics associated matrix spike were: 1) Benzo(a)anthracene (111@;). 3) Matrix blanks - All sediment matrix blanks had non-detectable levels of Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons and Compounds of Concern except the following: Blank id #: VWC93-012-BlankO709. Compounds detected in the sediment blank were: 1) Lindane (0.5 ppb); 2) Dieldrin (0.3 ppb); 3) Endrin (0.4-0.9 ppb); 4) PCB (20 ppb). Sediment samples related to the sediment blank were: 1) Allied Colloids (ACL1); 2) HRSD (HN5); 3) New Church Energy (NCE301); 4) Woodbridge Research Facility (WRF04F, WRFO8D); and 5) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station (NWS06A, NWS06F, NWS07B, NWS07C, NWS07F). Blank id#: VWC93-012-BlankO712. Compounds detected in the sediment blank were: 1) Dieldrin (0.3 ppb); and 2) Endrin (0.4 ppb). Sediment samples related to the sediment blank were: 1) Allied Colloids (ACL2, ACL3A, ACL3B); and 2) HRSD (HN6). Blank id#: VWC93-012-BlankO720. Compounds detected in the sediment blank were: 1) PCB (16 ppb). Sediment samples related to the sediment blank were: 1) HRSD (HN1). Blank id#: VWC93-012-BlankO820 (LY). Compounds detected in the sediment blank were: 1) PCB (2.8-8.3 ppb). Sediment samples related to the sediment blank were: 1) Boykins Narrow Fabrics (BNF4). DRAff-, Blank id#: VWC93-012-BlankO824. Compounds detected in the sediment blank were: 1) PCB (3.1-17 ppb). Sediment samples related to the sediment blank were: 1) Driver (DR15). Tissue: Detection levels reported for tissue organic analyses were 0.05- 0.5 ppb for halogenated compounds and 10 ppb for semi-volatile compounds. All compound concentrations are reported on a wet weight basis. Inorganic analyses: 1) Percent moisture: a) duplicates The relative percent difference between sample percent moistures and duplicate sample percent moistures was 0.6-2.006. 2) Percent lipid: a) blanks - All percent lipid blanks had non-detectable levels of lipid. Organic analyses: 1) Surrogate recoveries - all surrogate recoveries were within QC limits (QCL) except the following: Surrogate 1 (Si- 1,1-Binaphthyl): Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF5 (sunfish, above QCL). Surrogate 2 (S2 - Perinapthenone): Allied Colloids - ACL3 (minnows, crayfish, clams; blank below QCL). Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF5 (eel, above QCL; sunfish, below QCL). Driver - DRI5 (minnows, above QCL). New Church Energy - NCE3 (sunfish, blank below QCL), NCE4 (sunfish, blank below QCL). Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03 (largemouth bass, largemouth bass viscera, sunfish, sunfish viscera, blue back herring, blue back herring viscera, gizzard shad, gizzard shad viscera, carp; blank below QCL); white perch viscera (above QCL). Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWSOG (sunfish, blank below QCL), NWS07 (amphibians, sample above QCL, blank below QCL). Surrogate 3 (S3 - Tribromophenol): Allied Colloids - ACL3 (minnows, crayfish, clams; blank below-QCL). Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF4 (bowfin, sample below QCL, blank below QCL; crayfish, sample above QCL, blank below QCL; catfish, sunfish, chain pickerel, pirate perch, blank below QCL;); BNF5 (eel, chain pickerel, sunfish,.blank below QCL; pirate perch, sample below DRA"4 QCL; catfish, sample below QCL, blank below QCL). Dahlgren - DA5 (menhaden viscera, below QCL). HRSD.- HN7 (crabs, above QCL; oyster toad, below QCL). Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03 (largemouth bass, largemouth bass viscera, sunfish, sunfish viscera, blue back herring, blue back herring viscera, gizzard shad, gizzard shad viscera, carp; blank below QCL; catfish below QCL). Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS06 (sunfish, blank below QCL), NWS07 (amphibians, sample below QCL, blank below QCL). Surrogate 4 (S4 - Decachlorobiphenyl): Boykins Narrow Fabrics - BNF5 (pirate perch, below QCL). Dahlgren - DA5 (eel, below QCL; menhaden, striped bass, crabs, blank below QCL). Driver - DRIS (minnow, crabs, blank below QCL); DR18 (crabs, minnows, blank below QCL). HRSD - HN7 (crabs, sample above QCL, blank below QCL; eel, shellfish, oyster toad, blank below QCL); HN1 (shellfish, blank below QCL). New Church Energy - NCE3 (sunfish, blank above QCL), NCE4 (sunfish, blank above QCL). 2) Matrix Spikes: A) Blank matrix spikes: Pesticide-PCB blank matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 0-90*-.. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 6.4- 110%. Semi-volatile matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 0.3-75%. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 0-67%. B) Matrix spikes: Pesticide-PCB matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 13-106%. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 42- 156%. Samples with associated matrix spikes with greater than 100% recovery were: 1) Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03 (carp viscera, white perch, white perch viscera, catfish, catfish viscera). Compounds with recoveries above 100 percent were: 1) PCB (106'1*). Semi-volatile matrix spike results report spike recoveries of 4- 195%. Relative percent differences between spike recoveries and duplicate spike recoveries were 7-135%. Samples with associated matrix spikes with greater than 100% recovery were: 1) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station - NWS06 (amphibians). Compounds with recoveries above 100 percent were: 1') Benzo(b)fluoranthene (118%); 2) Benzo(k)fluoranthene (118%); 3) Benzo(a)pyrene (12311); 4) Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene (105-195-0,;); 4) Dibenz(a,h)anthracene (134%r); 5) Benzo(g,h,i)perylene (12011). DRAFT 3) Matrix blanks - All tissue matrix blanks had non-detectable levels of Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons and Compounds of Concern except the following: Blank id #: VWC93-012-BlankO712. Compounds detected in the tissue blank were: 1) Dieldrin (0.3 ppb); 3) Endrin (0.4 ppb). Samples associated with the blank were: 1) New Church Energy NCE3 (sunfish), NCE4 (sunfish). Blank id #: VWC93-012-BlankO720. Compounds detected in the tissue blank were: 1) PCB (16 ppb). Samples associated with the blank were: 1) Woodbridge Research Facility - WRF03 (carp viscera, white perch, white perch viscera, catfish, catfish viscera). Quality Assurance: The quality assurance (QA) data for the CZM BI phase II effluent splits are reported in Appendix A with the study's analytical results. The QA data for the DEQ BI sediment and tissue splits are reported in Appendix C. Effluent: The effluent samples used for QA analyses, the number of halogenated compounds identified by Spectrolytix VIMS, the commonly identified compounds, the Spectrolytix VIMS quantification (ppb) of commonly identified compounds, and the difference between quantitations (multiplicative difference) were: Driver: DRIO01, 1 1, PCB, 10 / 3.14, 3.18 HRSD: HN001, 2 0. Woodbridge Research Facility: WRF01 - 0 0. WRF02 - 0 0. WRF03 - 1 1, PCB, 15 6.88, 2.18 WRF08 - 1 1, PCB, 1.5 0.162, 9.26 WRF10 - 0 0. Sediment: The sediment samples used for QA analyses, the number of halogenated compounds identified by Spectrolytix VIMS, the commonly identified compounds, the Spectrolytix VIMS quantification (ppb) of commonly identified compounds, and the difference between cluantitations (multiplicative difference) were: DRA"I .Quantico Marine Base: QMSW1 - 6 /13, PCB, 40.5 / 643, 15.9. Chlordane, 1.2 2.4, 2. 4,41-DDD, 130 56, 5.8. 4,41-DDE, 53 175.6, 53. 4,41-DDT, 29 218.1, 7.5. Dieldrin, 0.6 3.1, 5.2. Tissue: The tissue samples used for QA analyses, the number of halogenated compounds identified by Spectrolytix VIMS, the commonly identified compounds, the Spectrolytix VIMS quantification (ppb) of commonly identified compounds, and the difference between quantitations (multiplicative difference) were: Quantico Marine Base: QMSW1 (carp fillet) - 4 / 7, PCB, 65.0 / 345.6, 5.3. Chlordane, 5.4 1.7, 3.1. 4,41-DDD, 27.4 155.9, 5.7. 4,41-DDE, 27.8 177.0, 6.4. QMCC01 (carp fillet) - 4 9, PCB, 59.0 / 248.0, 4.2. 4,41-DDD, 8.9 24.2, 2.7. 4,41-DDE, 20.4 70.6, 3.5. QMCC01 (carp viscera)- 4 7, PCB, 28.0 / 114.5, 4.1. 4,41-DDD, 3.'7 10.3, 2.7. 4,41-DDE, 11.0 31.9, 2.9. QMCC01 Rargemouth - 3 10, PCB, 16.0 / 83.7, 5.2. bass fillet) 4,41-DDD, 1.9 5.2, 2.7. 4,41-DDE, 6.1 19.7, 3.2. QMCC01 (white perch 5 9, PCB, 410.0 / 292.8, 1.4. fillet) Chlordane, 25.5 12.3, 3.3. 4,41-DDD, 57.0 19.2, 3.0. 4,41-DDE, 130.0 62.7, 2.0 QMCC01 (yellow - 1 5, 4,41-DDE, 1.4 / 4.2, 3.0. perch fillet) QMCC02 (goldfish - 4 6, PCB, 31.0 162.6, 5.2. fillet) Chlordane, cis + trans, 3.0 / 7.5, 2.5. 4,41-DDD, 4.4 24.9, 5.6. 4,41-DDE, 18.4 39.2, 2.1. QMCC02 (sunfish 5 7, PCB, 94.0 / 118.8, 1.3. fillet) 4,41-DDD, 16.8 9.2, 1.8. 4,41-DDE, 56.0 30.7, 1.8. DRAU QMCC02 (carp - 4 7, PCB, 14 / 48.1, 3.4. fillet) 4,41-DDD, 3.6 4.3, 1.2. 4,41-DDE, 7.0 14.6, 2.1. QMCC02 (largemouth 5 11, PCB, 540 / 1090.6, 2.0 bass viscera) Chlordane, cis + trans, 13.7 / 1.6, 8.5 4,4'-DDD, 100 73.4. 1.4. 4,41-DDE, 210 238.9, 1.1. QMCC02 (largemouth 6 5, PCB, 91 / 399.2, 4.4. fillet) Chlordane, cis + trans, 1.7 / 14.3, 8.3. 4,41-DDD, 9.7 23.1, 2.3. 4,41-DDE, 27.3 87.2, 3.2. QMCC02 (white perch 5 13, PCB, 360 / 384, 1.1. fillet) Chlordane, cis + trans, 17.4 / 1.3, 13.8. 4,4'-DDD, 7.4 21.9, 3.0. 4,41-DDE, 93.2 78.7, 1.2. QMCC03 (yellow 6 14, PCB, 140.0 / 1074.2, 7.7. perch viscera) Chlordane, cis + trans, 2.4 / 0.2, 14.1. 4,41-DDD, 19.4 62.8, 3.2. 4,4'-DDE, 31.8 172.5, 5.4. QMCC03 (largemouth - 2 8, PCB, 120.0 / 385.0, 3.2. fillet) 4,41-DDE, 83.0 / 79.9, 1. QMCC03 (largemouth - 1 12, PCB, 720.0 / 2905.0, 4.0. viscera) QMCC03 (sunfish 6 14, PCB, 86 / 157.7, 1.8. fillet) Chlordane, cis + trans, 2.0 / 6.1, 3. 4,41-DDD, 16.5 13.9, 1.2. 4,4'-DDE, 31.4 42.1, 1.3. Table 1. Stations sampled under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratabLe compounds in the Coastal Zone Management area of Virginia. Within each facility, sampling stations have been grouped by potential for pollutant transport interconnection. Station maps are provided in Appendix A. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region Station Fresh code Station namel Basin Receiving stream or salt 2 DAHLGREN NAVAL WEAPONS LAS DA-G1 Gambo Creek bet IRP Sites 2,9,12,19 and Hideaway Pond S DA1 Gambo Cr bet IRP site 19 and Hideaway Pond, Dahlgren NWL POTOM Gambo Cr to Potomac R DA2 Gambo Cr bet IRP sites 2,9,12, ab Hideaway Pond, Dahlgren NW POTOM Gambo Cr to Potomac R DA3 Hideaway Pond outfaLt, DahLgren NWL POTOM Hideaway Pond to Gambo Cr to Potomac R DA-G2 STP outfaLL 001 to Potomac R S DA4 Potomac R, 20 m bet DASTPO01, approx 0.2 mi ab Machodoc Cr POTOM Potomac R DA5 Potomac R, 20 m ab DASTP00i, approx 0.2 mi ab Machodoc Cr POTOM Potomac R DASTP001 Dahtgren Naval Weapons Lab STP 001 POT004 Potomac R QUANTICO MARINE BASE QM-G1 OutfaLL 060 and internal sampling point 360 F OM060 Quantico Marine Base 060 POTOM Potomac R QM360 Quantico Marine Base 360 POTOM Potomac'R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region continued Station Fresh code Station namel Basin Receiving stream or saLt2 WOODBRIDGE RESEARCH FACILITY (HARRY DIAMOND LABS) WRF-G1 Old landfill, IRP Site I to Occoquan Bay F WRF03 Occoquan Say off Woodbridge Res. Fac. old landfill, IRP Site I POTOM Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF04 Woodbridge Research Fac. old landfill, IRP Site 1 POTOM Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF10 Woodbridge Research Facility 30 m E old tandfiLL/IRP Site 1 POTOM Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF-G2 Main compound to storm drainages to Potomac River F WRF05 Potomac R at N confL of Woodbridge Research Fac. main X-trib POTOM Potomac R WRF06 Potomac R at NW conft of Woodbridge Research Fac. main X-trib POTON Potomac R WRF07 Woodbridge Research Facility main compound W side stormwater POTOM X-trib to Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF08 Woodbridge Research Facility main compound S side stormwater POTOM X-trib to Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF09 Woodbridge Research Facility main compound N side stormwater POTOM X-trib to Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF-G3 Stormwater discharge below IRP Site 3 F WRF01 Woodbridge Research Facility stormwater disch beL IRP Site 3 POTOM X-trib to Occoquan R to Potomac R WRF-G4 Stormwater discharge below IRP Site 6A F WRF02 Woodbridge Research Facility stormwater disch beL IRP Site 6A POTOM X-trib to Occoquen R to Potomac R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Piedmont Region Station Fresh code Station namel Basin Receiving stream or salt2 CHESAPEAKE CORP. CC-G1 Outfalt 001 to Pamunkey River S CC001 Ch esapeake Corp. 001 YORK Pamunkey R FORT A.P. HILL APH-G1 X-trib to Rappahannock R. 5m below Cooke Camp STP F APH1 X-trib to Rapp R 5m bet Cooke Camp STP, Ft. AP Hill RAPP X-trib to Rappahannock R APH-G2 X-trib to Rappahannock R. bet seep, 5m below Wilcox pumpwash F APH2 X-trib to Rapp R bet seep, 5m bet Wilcox pumpwash, Ft. AP Hill RAPP X-trib to Rappahannock R APH-G3 Doctor's Branch above Boonate Branch F APH3 Doctor's Br ab BoonaLe Br, Ft. AP Hill RAPP Doctor's Br to Rappahannock R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Piedmont Region continued Station Fresh code Station namel Basin Receiving stream or salt 2 APH-G4 X-trib above Mitt Creek, off Witdernes s Trait F APH4 X-trib ab Mitt Cr, off Wilderness Tr, Ft. AP Hit( RAPP X-trib to Milt Cr to Rappahannock R APH-G5 Burma Rd drainage below Sates Corner landfill F APH5 Burma Rd drainage bet Sates Corner Landfill, Ft. AP Hill RAPP Rappahannock R APH-G6 Mount Cr above West Branch at Ewell Rd F APH6 Mount Cr ab West Br at Ewell Rd, Ft. AP Hitt RAPP Mount Cr to Rappahannock R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental QuaLity's Tidewater Region Station Fresh 2 code Station namel Basin Receiving stream or salt ALLIED COLLOIDS ACL-G1 OutfaLL 001 to X-trib to Nansemond River S ACLOO1 Allied Colloids 001 JAMES X-trib to Nansemond R ACL1 X-trib to Nansemond R, immed bet ACLO01 JAMES X-trib to Nansemond R ACL2 X-trib to Nansemond R, 70 m bet ACLO01 JAMES X-trib to Nansemond R ACL3 Nansemond R conft X-trib draining ACL001 JAMES Nansemond R BOYKINS NARROW FABRICS CORP. BNF-G1 OutfalL 001 to X-trib to Tarrara Creek F BNFO01 Boykins Narrow Fabrics Corp. 001 CHOW X-trib to Tarrara Cr to Meherrin R BNF1 X-trib to Tarrara Cr, immed bet BNFOOI CHOW X-trib to Tarrara Cr to Meherrin R BNF2 Tarrara, Cr conft BNFOOI X-trib CHOW Tarrara Cr to Meherrin R BNF4 Tarrara Cr 40 m bet confL BNF001 X-trib CHOW Tarrara Cr to Meherrin R BNF5 Tarrara Cr at Rt 35 bridge CHOW Tarrara Cr to Meherrin R BNF-G2 Tarrara Cr 40 yds ab confL BNFO01 X-trib F BNF3 Tarrara Cr 40 m ab conft BUFOO1 X-trib CHOW Tarrara Cr to Meherrin R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region Station Fresh@ code station namel Basin Receiving stream or saLt2 DRIVER NAVAL RADIO TRANSMITTING FACILITY DRI-G1 PCB site on X-trib to Star Creek S DR1001 Driver Naval Radio Transmitting Fac. PCB site treated effluent JAMES Nansemond R. DR11 X-trib to Star Cr upstr bound. Driver PCB site JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR12 X-trib to Star Cr upstr bound. Driver PCB site L/R HtideLine JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR13 X-trib to Star Cr 50 m ab Driver PCB site, wetlands JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR1301 Driver Naval Radio Transmitting Fac. PCB site influent JAMES Nansemond R DR14 X-trib to Star Cr 100 m ab Driver PCB site, wetlands JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR15 X-trib to Star Cr downstr bound. Driver PCB site JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR16 X-trib to Star Cr 50 m bet Driver PCB site JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR17 X-trib to Star Cr 100 m bet Driver PCB site JAMES X-trib to Star Cr to Nansemond R DR18 Star Cr at conft Driver PCB site X-trib JAMES Star Cr to Nansemond R HAMPTON ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT - NANSEMOND STP HN-G1 outfatt 001 to Nansemond River S HN001 HRSD - Nansemond STP 001 JAMES Nansemond R HN1 Nansemond R, 100 m N of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R HN2 Nansemond R, 100 m NW of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R HN3 Nansemond R, 100 m W of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R HN4 Nansemond R, 100 m S of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R HN5 Nansemond R, 100 m SE of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R HN6 Nansemond R, 100 m E of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R HN7 Nansemond R, 200 m S of HN001 JAMES Nansemond R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental QuaLity's Tidewater Region continued Station Fresh code Station namel Basin Receiving stream or saLt2 NASA GODDARD FLIGHT CENTER NSG-GI NASA Goddard Flight Center 001 F' NSGO01 NASA Goddard Flight Center 001 CHES Fresh X-trib to Mosquito Cr to Atlantic NEW CHURCH ENERGY ASSOCIATES NCE-G1 OutfaLL 001 to X-trib to Pitt's Creek F NCEOOI New Church Energy Associates 001 CHES X-trib to Pitts Cr to Chesapeake Bay NCE2 X-trib to Pitt's Cr, immed bet NCE001 CHES X-trib to Pitts Cr to Chesapeake Say NCE3 X-trib to Pitt's Cr, 10 m bet NCE001 CHES X-trib to Pitts Cr to Chesapeake Bay NCE301 New Church Energy Associates treatment Lagoon immed ab 001 CHES X-trib to Pitts Cr to Chesapeake Bay NCE4 X-trib to Pitt's Cr, 150 m bet NCE001 CHES X-trib to Pitts Cr to Chesapeake Bay NCE5 X-trib to'Pitt's Cr at RR, 30 m bet product silo storm outfaLL CHES X-trib to Pitts Cr to Chesapeake Say YORKTOWN NAVAL WEAPONS STATION NWS-G1 East and west X-tribs to Roosevelt Pond F NWS06 X-trib to Roosevelt Pond, at E end bypass rd, Yorktown NWS YORK X-trib to Roosevelt Pond to York R NWS07 X-trib to Roosevelt Pond, at W end bypass rd, Yorktown NWS YORK X-trib to Roosevelt Pond to York R NWS09 Roosevelt Pond spillway, Yorktown NWS YORK Roosevelt Pond to York R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued Station Fresh code Station name Basin Receiving stream or salt 2 NWS-G2 Skiff's Cr at facility perimeter fence F NWS01 Skiff's Cr at Yorktown Naval Weapons Station fence YORK Skiff's Cr to York R NWS-G3 Pond #10 spillway F NWS05 Yorktown Naval Weapons Station Pond #10 spillway YORK NWS Pond #10 to King tr to York R NWS-G4 Pond #11 spillway F NWS04 Yorktown Naval Weapons Station Pond #11 spillway YORK NWS Pond #11 to King Cr to York R NWS-G5 Pond #11A spillway F NWS03 Yorktown Naval Weapons Station Pond #11A spillway YORK NWS Pond #11A to King Cr to York R NWS-G6 Pond #12 spillway F NWS02 Yorktown Naval Weapons Station Pond #12 spillway YORK NWS Pond #12 to King Cr to York R Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quatity8s Tidewater Region -- continued Station Fresh .code station name Basin Receiving stream or salt 2 NWS-G7 Seep at end of Barracks Rd F NWS08 Seep at end of Barracks Rd, Yorktown NWS YORK York R NWS-G8 Dredge spoil drainage pipe at Colonial Parkway F NWS10 Yorktown NWS dredge spoil drainage pipe at Colonial Parkway YORK York R Table I continued. Notes: Abbreviations used within station names include the following: X-trib=unnamed tributary, ab--above, bet=betow, confL=confLuence, wmeters, mi=miles, R=river, Cr=creek, Rzraitroad, IRP=U.S. Dept. of Defense Intensive Remediation Program. 2Indicates whether the immediate receiving stream has been designated fresh water or salt water for the purposes of applying appropriate satinity-dependent standards and criteria within this report. DiSCUBsion DRAFT Distribution of biocancentratable compounds in Virginia's CZM area. Of the 276 compounds identified in the CZM BI study samples (table 2), 39 (Aroclors and chlorobiphenyl, poly- totaled as PCB,, Chlordane cis, trans-, totaled as Chlordane, and 2,4'-DDE, 4,41- DDE, totaled as DDE) were identified as CZM BI study compounds of concern (COC) (table 2) due to their potential to bioconcentrate and create human health and environmental risks. There was insufficient information on most of the remaining 237 compounds to determine whether or not.they should also be classified as COC. Certain generic groups such as aliphatic hydrocarbons and alcohols were assumed not to be COC based on the group's general quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR). Effluent/water. The three COC with the highest frequency of occurrence in water/effluent samples were,,by decreasing frequency: 1) PCB; 2) Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethylhexyl) ester; and 3) Lindane (table 2). Remaining COC in water/effluent samples had a frequency of 1 and were comprised of both halogenated compounds and poly-nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) (table 2). The number of COC (10) identified in water/effluent samples were approximately 25*-. of the total number of COC identified (table 2). These data indicate relatively few facilities currentl release COC. However, data indicate current releases of COC represent an exposure pathway for human health and environmental risk. of the ten COC identified in water/effluent samples, five were also identified in tissues samples (figure 1). The compounds, in order of frequency of occurrence in tissue samples were: 1-2) Endrin, PCB; 3-5) Heptachlor, Lindane, Phthalic acid, diethyl ester- (table 2). Sediment. The eight COC with the highest frequency of occurrence in sediment samples were, by decreasing frequency: 1) Fluoranthene; 2) Pyrene; 3) PCB; 4) Benzofbjfluoranthene;-5) Chrysene; 6) DDE; 7) Benz(alanthracene; and 8) DDD, DDT (table 2). Remaining COC in sediment samples had a frequency < 25 and are comprised of both halogenated compounds and PAHs (table 2). The number of COC (29) identified in the sediment matrix was almost three times the number of COC identified in effluent/water samples (10) and tissue samples (12) (table 2). These numbers indicate sediments represent a substantial source of bioconcentratable compounds in the CZM area of Virginia. The numbers also indicate that substantial amounts of bioconcentratable compounds have been introduced to Virginia's CZM area surface water envir nmen through historical releases. The prevalence and p@r'sistence-cf the sediment COC create a potential for establishing exposure pathways through food chain mechanisms (bioaccumulation). Of the 29 COC identified in the CZM BI sediment samples, nine'w6re identified in tissue samples of indigenous fish and shellfish (Figure 1). The compounds, by decreasing frequency of occurrence in tissue samples were: 1) Chlordane; 2/3) DDE, PCB; 4) DDD; 5) DDT; 6) Endrin; 7) Dieldrin; 8) Endrin aldehyde; 9) Benzo[alpyrene (table 2). Tissue. The three COC with the highest frequency of occurrence in tissue samples were, by decreasing frequency: 1) Fluoranthene; 2) DDD; 3) Pyrene / DDT / Benzo[b1fluoranthene (table 2). Remaining COC in tissue samples had a frequency < 2 and are comprised of both halogenated compounds and PAHs (table 2). Of the 39 COC, 12 were identified in tissue samples of indigenous fish, shellfish, and amphibians (table 2). The compounds, in order of frequency of occurrence in tissue samples were: 1) Chlordane; 2) DDE; 3) PCB; 4) DDD; 5) DDT; 6) Endrin; 7) Dieldrin; 8) Endrin aldehyde; 9-12) Heptachlor, Lindane, Phthalic acid, diethyl ester, Benzo[alpyrene (table 2). Data indicate sediments were the dominant source of tissue COC (figure 1) and that bioaccumulation of COC was a more prevalent exposure pathway than bioconcentration. Compounds 9-11 were found in water/effluent samples only, compounds 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 11 were found in sediment samples only, and compounds 3 and 6 were found in sediment and water samples (table 2). Soil. The frequency of occurrence of compounds in soil samples was not considered in overall prevalence analyses as the samples were collected at one site. These data are discussed below under the site specific risk assessments. @Wnmen DRAFT Distribution of bioconcentratable compounds -in the DEO Northern Region of Virginia's CZM area. Of the 276 compounds identified in all CZM BI study samples, 200 were identified in CZM BI study samples from the DEQ Northern Region MR) of the Virginia CZM area (table 2). Of the 39 compounds identified as COC in the CZM BI study, 35 were identified in samples collected in the NR (table 2). Effluent/water. Only two COC had frequencies of occurrence in the NR phase II samples greater than one (table 2). PCBs were identified in four samples, and Endrin aldehyde was identified in two samples (table 2). The remaining six compounds identified in NR water/effluent samples consisted of a mixture of halogenated compounds and PAHs (Table 2). The percentage of COC identified in NR water/effluent samples (23%) was slightly below the overall CZM area percentage. These data indicate few facilities in the NR currently release COC. However, data indicate current releases in the NR are a potential exposure pathway for human health and environmental risk. of the eigh t COC identified in water/effluent samples, two were also identified in tissues samples (figure 2). The compounds, by decreasing frequency of occurrence in tissue samples were: 1) PCBs; and 2) Endrin (table 2). Sediment. The nine COC with the highest frequency of occurrence in NR sediment samples were, by decreasing frequency: 1) PCB; 2-3) Pyrene, fluoranthene; 4-5) Chrysene, Benzo[blfluoranthene; 6) DDE; 7) DDD; 8) Benz[alanthracene; and 9) DDT (table 2). Remaining COC in sediment samples had a frequency < 11 and were comprised of both halogenated compounds and PAHs '(table 2). The number of COC (27) identified in the sediment matrix was over three times the number of COC identified in effluent/water samples (8) and tissue samples (8) (table 2). These numbers indicate NR sediments represent a substantial source of bioconcentratable compounds in the NR CZM area of Virginia and that substantial amounts of COC in the NR CZM area are attributable to historical releases. Tissue data (table 2) suggest bioaccumulation uptake from this source has created an exposure pathway for risk effects. All of the COC identified in NR tissue samples were identified in NR sediment samples (Figure 2). The compounds, by decreasing frequency of occurrence in NR tissue samples were: 1) Chlordane; 2) PCB; 3) DDE; 4) DDD; 5) DDT; 6) Endrin; 7) Dieldrin; 8) Benzo[alpyrene (table 2). Tissue. D RA F7 The eight COC in NR tissue samples are reported above. Also as noted above, sediments appeared to be the dominant source of tissue COC. Of the eight COC identified in NR tissue samples, none were exclusively identified in NR water/effluent samples. Compound 7 was found in NR sediment samples only, and compounds 1-6, and 8 were found in both NR sediment and water samples (table 2). DRA", Northern Region site specific risk assessments. Study sites in the NR of Virginia's CZM area which were sampled through phase III were the Dahlgren Naval Weapons Lab (DA), and the Woodbridge Research Facility (WRF). Both sites are Federal facilities. The DA facility is currently in the Remedial .Investigation / Feasibility Study phase of its IRP project. The WRF facility has recently completed the Preliminary Assessment phase of its IRP project. The WRF facility has been designated for base closure by 1997. The following comments apply to all site specific risk assessments: 1) Additive risk from all COC exceeding human health standards and/or criteria is believed to be larger than risk for individual COC (EPA 19XX); 2) A general quality assurance problem associated with the analyses of water/effluent samples was the potential for over quantification of halogenated compounds, specifically PCBs; 3) A general quality assurance problem associated with the analyses of sediment and tissue samples was the potential for missed identifications of halogenated compounds and under quantification of identified halogenated compounds, specifically PCBs; 4) Risk assessments of sediment and tissue data totaled DDD, DDE, and DDT as DDE, and Endrin and Endrin aldehyde as Endrin. Dahlqren Naval Weapons Lab. The DA site sampled through phase III (DA-G2) encompassed an area of the Potomac River bounded by a 50 yd arch with its focal point at the DASTP001 outfall (Appendix A). The site boundary was extended around DASTPOO1, into the adjacent wetlands, to encompass the drainage swale originating at the Dahlgren Pesticide Rinse Area IRP site (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 27 were identified in phase,II and phase II.I samples from DA-G2 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. Of the five COC identified in the phase II DA-G2 samples (table 3), one exceeded Virginia's Water Quality Standard for the protection of human health (VHHO, 10-' risk level) (Virginia DEQ 19XX), two exceeded the Federal water Quality Criteria for the protection of human health (FHHO, 10' risk level) (EPA 19XX), five exceeded the Virginia Water Quality Standard for the chronic protection of aquatic life.(VALC) (Virginia DEQ 19XX), and four exceeded the Federal Water Quality Criteria for the continuous protection of aquatic life (FALC) (EPA 19XX) (table 4). The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and order of magnitude (OM) of the exceedences were: 1) Lindane, FHHO - 1 OM, VALC - 0 OM; 2) Endrin, VALC - 2 OM, FALC - 2 OM; 3) Heptachlor, DRAff. VHHO - 2 OM, FHHO - 3 OM, VALC - 2 OM, FALC 2 OM; 4) Heptachlor* epoxide, FHHO - 3 OM, FALC 2 OM; and 5) Methoxychlor - 2 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the DA-G2 phase II sample was 10-3 for both Heptachlor and Heptachlor epoxide. Quality control problems associated with analyses of DA-G2 water/effluent samples included: 1) recovery of the perinapthenone surrogate above the QCL. Sediment risk estimates. Currently there are no criteria or standards available for estimating risk from sediment bound COC. Criteria and guidance values currently available for the assessment of sediment contamination focus primarily 'on the acute and chronic protection of aquatic life. Of the 22 COC identified in the phase III DA-G2 sediment samples (table 3), seven exceeded the National Status and Trends Effects Range Low (NERL) (NOAA 19XX), and five exceeded the National Status and Trends Effects Range Medium (NERM) (NOAA 19XX). The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and order of magnitude (OM) of the exceedences were: 1) PCB, NERL - 1 OM; 2) Chlordane, NERL - 1 OM, NERM - 0 OM; 3) DDD, NERL 2 OM, NERM - 1 OM; 4) DDE, NERL - 2 OM, NERM 1 OM; 5) DDT, NERL 2 OM, NERM 1 OM; 6) Dieldrin, NERL - 3 OM, NERM - 2 OM; and 7) Phenanthrene, NERL - 0 OM (table 4). Maximum estimated risk levels for single COC identified in the DA-*G2 phase III sediment samples could not be determined due to a lack of risk based criteria or standards. The risk from sediment contamination at DA-G2 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as eight of the COC in the DA-G2 sediments were identified in DA-G2 tissue samples (figure 3). Quality control problems associated with analyses of DA-G2 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the perinapthenone and tribromophenol surrogates below the QCL; 2) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate above the QCL; and 3) greater than 100-0. recovery of semi-volatile matrix spikes. Tissue risk estimates. Of the nine COC identified in the phase III DA-G2 tissue samples, one exceeded the Virginia DEQ draft Screening Value for Tissue (VTSV, 10-5 risk level) (Virginia DEQ 19XX), and four exceeded the EPA III Risk Based Concentration screening values (FRBT, 10-6 risk level) (EPA 19XX). The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and order of magnitude (OM) of the exceedences were: 1) PCB, VTSV - 1 OM, FRBT - 3 OM; 2) Chlordane, FRBT 0 OM; 3) DRAFT Total DDE, FRBT - 1 OM; 4) Dieldrin, FRBT - 1 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the DA-G2 phase III tissue samples was 10-3 for PCB. Quality control problems associated with analyses of DA-G2 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the tribromophenol surrogates below the QCL in the Menhaden viscera sample; 2) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL in the eel sample; and 3) recovery of-the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL in the blank associated with the menhaden, striped bass, and crab sample. DRAff Woodbridge Research Facility-WRF-Gi. The WRF-G1 site sampled through phase III encompassed an area of the Potomac River bounded by a 70 yd arch with its focal point at the base of the old landfill designated as site #1 under the facility's IRP (Appendix A). The site boundary was extended around, into the adjacent woods and field, to encompass the entire old landfill site (Appendix A). The terrestrial portion of the WRF-G1 site was included due to the presence of PCBs in the phase II samples and a general lack of knowledge as to the source of the PCBs. Surface soil samples were collected from the site in an attempt to identify and bracket, the PCB source. Of the 39 COC, 33 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from WRF-G1 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. Of the two COC identified in the phase II WRF-G1 sample (table 3) one (PCB) exceeded the VHHO by 5 OM, the FHHO by 6 OM", the VALC by 3 OM, and the FALC by 3 OMAtable 4). The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the WRF-G1 phase II sample was 10-0 for PCB. Quality control problems associated with analyses of WRF-G1 water/effluent samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1- binaphthyl and Perinapthenone surrogates below the QCL. Sediment risk-estimates. Of the 26 COC identified in the phase III WRF-G1 sediment samples (table 3), three exceeded the NERL. The compounds and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Chlordane - 1 OM; 2) Dieldrin - 1 OM; and 3) Endrin - 2 OM (table 4). Risk from sediment contamination at WRF-G1 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as ten of the COC in the WRF-G1 sediments were identified in DA-G2 tissue samples (figure 4). Quality control problems associated with analyses of WRF-G1 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the perinapthenone and tribromophenol surrogates above the QCL in the duplicate blank; and 2) recovery of the tribromophenol surrogate above the QCL. Tissue risk estimates. Of the 10 COC identified in the phase III DA-G2 tissue samples, four exceeded the VTSV and/or the FRBT. The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and order of magnitude (OM) of the exc.eedences were: 1) PCB, VTSV 2 OM, FRBT - 4 OM; 2) Chlordane, FRBT - I OM; 3) Total DDE, FRBT 2 OM; and 4) Dieldrin, FRBT - 1 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC DRAFT identified in the WRF-G1 phase III tissue samples was 10-2 for PCB. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of WRF-G1 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone and Tribromophenol surrogates below the QCL in the blank; 2) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate above the QCL in the white perch sample; 3) recovery of the tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL in the catfish sample; 3) greater than 1000-. recovery (106*1) of PCB in the matrix spike; and 4) detection of PCBs in the matrix blank. Soil risk estimates. Of the 23 COC identified in the phase III DA-G2 soil samples, two exceeded the FRBT. The compounds, and OM of the exceedences were:' 1) PCB - 1 OM; and 2) Benzo[alpyrene - 0 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the WRF-G1 phase III soil samples was 101 for PCB. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of WRF-G1 soil samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binaphthyl surrogate above the QCL; 2) recovery of the 1,1-Binaphthyl surrogate below the QCL in the blank; 3) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL; 4) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate above the QCL in the duplicate blank; 5) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL; 6) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl below the QCL; and 7) recovery of the Decachlorbiphenyl above the QCL; 8) detection of Lindane, Dieldrin, Endrin, and PCB in the matrix blank. DRAFT, Woodbridge Research Facility WRF-G2. The WRF-G2 site sampled through phase III encompassed approximately 0.25 miles of the upper section of an unnamed tributary receiving a point source discharge from the main compound of the Woodbridge Research Facility (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, nine were identified in phase II and phase III samples from WRF-G2 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. The single COC identified in the phase II WRF-G2 sample, PCB, (table 3) exceeded the VHHO by 4 OM, the FHHO by 5 OM, the VALC by 2 OM, and the FALC by 2 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for the PCB identified in the WRF-G2 phase II sample was 10-1 No quality control problems were associated with analyses of WRF-G2 sediment samples. Sediment risk estimates. Of the nine COC identified in the phase III WRF-G2 sediment samples (table 3), one (PCB) exceeded the NERL by 4 OM and the NERM by 3 OM (table 4). Quality control problems associated with analyses of WRF-G2 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-binaphthyl below the QCL; 2) detection of Lindane, Dieldrin, Endrin, and PCB in the matrix blank. Tissue risk estimates. Attempts to collect tissue samples at WRF-G2 were unsuccessful. DRAFT Distribution of bioconcentratable compounds in the DEO Piedmont Region of Virginia's CZM area. Of the 276 compounds identified in all CZM BI study samples, four were identified in CZM BI study samples from the DEQ Piedmont Region (PR) of the Virginia CZM area (table 2). Of the 39 compounds identified as COC in the CZM BI study, two were identified in samples collected in the PR (table 2). Both COC were identified in phase II samples from Chesapeake Corporation. The concentration of Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethylhexyl) ester in .the Chesapeake Corporation phase II sample exceeded the VHHO by 1 OM and the FHHO by 2 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for the exceedence was 104. No quality contr ol or quality assurance problems were associated with analyses of CC-G1 phase II samples. As described above, none of the PR sites sampled under phase II of the CZM BI study were sampled under phase III. DRAFT., Distribution of biocancentratable compounds -in the DEO Tidewater Region of Virginia's CZM area. Of the 276 compounds identified in all CZM BI study samples, 161 were identified in CZM BI study samples from the DEQ Tidewater Region (TR) of the Virginia CZM area (table 2). Of the 39 compounds identified as COC in the CZM BI study, 27 were identified in samples collected in the TR (table 2). Effluent/water. Only one COC (PCB), had a frequency of occurrence in the TR phase II samples greater than one (table 2). PCBs were identified in six samples (table 2). The remaining three compounds identified in the TR phase II samples consisted of a mixture of halogenated compounds and PAHs (Table 2). The percentage of COC identified in TR water/effluent, samples (lS'-.) was below the overall CZM area percentage. These data indicate few facilities in the TR currently release COC. However, data indicate current releases in the TR are a potential exposure pathway for human health and environmental risk. Of the four COC identified in water/effluent samples, two were also identified in tissues samples (figure 6). The compounds, by decreasing frequency of occurrence in tissue samples were: 1) PCBs; and 2) Lindane (table 2). Sediment. The 11 COC with the highest frequency of occurrence in the TR sediment samples were, by decreasing frequency: 1) Fluoranthene; 2) Pyrene; 3) PCB; 4) Benzo[blfluoranthene; 5) Chrysene; 6) DDE; 7) Benz[alanthracene.; 8) DDT; 9) Phenanthrene; 10) DDD; and 11) Chlordane (table 2). Remaining COC in sediment samples had a frequency < 10 and were comprised of both halogenated compounds and PAHs (table 2). The number of COC (22) identified in the sediment matrix was over five times the number of COC identified in effluent/water samples (4) and over two times the number of COC identified in tissue samples (9) (table 2). These numbers, indicate TR sediments represent a substantial source of bioconcentratable compounds in the TR CZM area of Virginia and that substantial amounts of COC in the TR CZM area are attributable to historical releases. Tissue data (table 2) suggest bioaccumulation uptake from this source has created an exposure pathway for risk effects. Of the nine COC identified in TR tissue samples, six were identified in TR sediment samples (Figure 2). The six compounds, by decreasing frequency of occurrence were: 1) DDE; 2) PCB; 3) DDD; 4) Chlordane; S) DDT; 6) Dieldrin (table 2). TiBsue. DRAFT Lindane, and Phthalic acid, diethyl ester were identified in TR tissue samples in addition to the six COC reported above. Sediments appeared to be the dominant source of tissue COC. Of the nine COC identified in the TR tissue samples, none were exclusively identified in TR phase II samples (table 2). DRAFT Tidewater Region site sDecific risk assessments. Study sites in the TR of Virginia's CZM area which were sampled through phase III were: 1) Allied Colloids; 2) Boykins Narrow Fabrics Corp.; 3) Driver Naval Transmitting Facility; 4) HRSD - Nansemond STP; 5) New Church Energy Associates; and 6) Yorktown Naval Weapons Station. Sites 3 and 6 are Federal facilities, both of which are in the Remedial Investigation phase of their respective IRP projects. Site 3 has been designated for base closure. Sites 1, 2, and 5 are a chemical plant, a narrow fabrics plant, and a petroleum product manufacturing plant respectively. Site 4 is a regional sewage treatment plant. Allied Colloids. The Allied Colloids site sampled through phase III (ACL-Gl) encompassed an unnamed tributary of the Nansemond River from the Allied Colloids 001 discharge to the confluence with the Nansemond River (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 13 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from ACL-G1 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. No COC were identified in the phase II ACL-G1 samples (table 3), despite recoveries of the 1,1-biphenyl and perinapthenone surrogates above the QCL. Sediment risk estimates. Of the 13 COC identified in the phase III ACL-G1 sediment samples (table 3), four exceeded the NERL and two exceeded the NERM. The compounds, screening value exceeded, and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Chlordane, NERL - 2 OM, NERM 1 OM; 2) DDD, NERL - 0 OM; 3) DDE, NERL - 0 OM; 4) DDT NERL 0 OM, NERM - 0 OM. Risk from sediment contamination at ACL-G1 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as four of the COC in the ACL-G1 sediments were identified in DA-G2 tissue samples (figure 7). Quality control problems associated with analyses of ACL-Gi sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL in the blank; 2) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate above the QCL; 3) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL; 4) recovery of the decachlorobiphenyl surrogate above the QCL; and 5) detection-of Lindane, Dieldrin, Endrin, and PCB in the blank., Tissue risk estimates. DRA", Of the four COC identified in the phase III ACL-G1 tissue (table 3) samples, one (PCB) exceeded the FRBT by 2 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for the PCB identified in the ACL-G1 phase III tissue samples was 104. Quality control problems associated with analyses of ACL-G1 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone and Tribromophenol surrogates below the QCL in the minnows, crayfish, and clams blank. Boykins Narrow Fabrics. DRAFT The Boykins Narrow Fabrics site sampled through phase III (BNF- Gl) encompassed an unnamed tributary to Tarrara Creek from the Boykins Narrow Fabrics 001 discharge to the confluence with Tarrara Creek, and Tarrara Creek at the Rt. 35 bridge (approximately one mile below the unnamed tributary confluence) (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 10 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from BNF-G1 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimateB. No COC were identified in the phase II BNF-G1 samples (table 3). No quality control problems were associated with the phase II samples from BNF-G1. Sediment risk estimates. A background sediment sample was collected immediately above the confluence of the unnamed tributary with Tarrara Creek (BNF-G2, BNF3) to identify sediment contaminants with upstream sources. The BNF3 sediment sample contained one COC, DDD. The sample DDD concentration did not exceed any sediment evaluation criteria. Quality control problems associated with the BNF3 sediment sample included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone and Tribromophenol surrogates below the QCL. Of the nine COC identified in the phase III BNF-G1 sediment samples (table 3), three exceeded the NERL. The compounds and OM of the exceedences were: 1) DDE - 0 OM; 2) Dieldrin - 2 OM; and 3) PCB - I OM (table 4). Risk from sediment contamination at BNF -G1 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as three of the COC in the BNF-G1 sediments were.identified in BNF-G1 tissue samples (figure 8). Quality control problems associated with analyses of BNF-G1 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone and. Tribromophenol surrogates below the QCL in the blank; and 2) recovery of the tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL; 3) greater than 100-*. recovery of semi-volatile matrix spikes; and 4) detection of PCB in the blank. Tissue risk estimates. Efforts to collect tissue samples in the unnamed tributary were generally unsuccessful with the exception of a couple of crayfish collected immediately below the 001 discharge. Therefore, most tissue data for BNF-G1 reflects tissue contamination levels from below the unnamed tributary confluence with Tarrara Creek. Of the four COC identified in the phase III DA-G2 tissue samples, DRAFT two exceeded the FRBT. The compounds and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Total DDT*- 1 OM; and 2) PCB - 1 OM. The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the WRF-G1 phase III tissue samples was 10-5 for DDT and PCB. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of WRF-G1 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binapthyl surrogate below the QCL in the BNF5 sunfish sample; 2) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate above the QCL in the BNFS eel sample; 3) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL in the BNF5 sunfish sample; 4) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL for the BNF4 and BNF5 samples; 5) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL for the -BNF4 bowfin and BNF5 pirate perch and catfish samples; 6) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate above the QCL for. the BNF4 crayfish sample; and 7) recovery of the decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL for the BNF5 pirate perch sample. DRAff. Driver Naval Transmitting Facility. The Driver site sampled through phase III (DRI-Gl) encompassed an unnamed tributary to Star Creek from the Driver IRP PCB site to the confluence of the unnamed tributary and Star Creek (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 15 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from DRI-Gi (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. The phase II sample collected from the DRI-G1 site was an effluent sample from a PCB treatment plant which was on site to treat water drained from removed marsh sediments which were contaminated with PCBs. Only one COC, PCB, was identified in the phase II DRI-G1 sample (table 3). The sample PCB concentration exceeded the VHHO by 5 OM, the FHHO by 6 OM, the VALC by 3 OM, and the FALC by 3 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated.risk level for the PCB identified in the DRI-G1 phase II sample was 10-0. .Quality control problems associated with analyses of DRI-G1 phase II samples included: 1) less than 100'-. recovery of semi-volatile matrix spikes. Sediment risk estimates. Of the 13 COC identified in the phase III DRI-G1 sediment samples (table 3), one (PCB) exceeded the NERL by 2 OM and the NERM by 1 OM. Risk from sediment contamination at BNF -GI may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as two of the COC in the DRI-G1 sediments were identified in BNF-G1 tissue samples (figure 9). Quality control problems associated with analyses of DRI-G1 sediment samples inc.luded: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binapthyl surrogate above the QCL in DR16; 2) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL in the blank; 3) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL in DRIS and DR17; 4) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL in the blank; 5) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate above the QCL in DRI1; 6) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL in DRI5, 7, BA, 8B;.7) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QC1 in DRI8B; 8) detection of PCBs in the DRI5 blank. Tissue risk estimates. DRAF7 Of the three COC identified in the phase III DRI-G1 tissue samples, only PCP exceeded tissue assessment criteria. Tissue sample PCB concentration at DRI-G1 exceeded the VTSV by 3 OM, the Food and Drug Administration's Action Level (FDA 19XX) by 1 OM, and the FRBT by 5 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for the PCB identified in the DRI-G1 phase II sample was 10-1. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of DRI-G1 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate above the QCL in the DRIS minnow sample; and 2) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL in the DRI5 and DRI8 blanks; HRSD Nansemond-STP. DRAFT The HRSD Nansemond-STP site sampled through phase III (HN-Gi) encompassed an area surrounding the Nansemond-STP 001 outfall in Virginia's Hampton Roads (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 19 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from HN-G1 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. Of the two COC identified in the phase II HN-G1 sample (table 3), one (BHC, alpha-) exceeded the FHHO by 0 OM and one (Lindane) exceeded the VALC by 0 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the WRF-G1 phase II sample was 10-6 for both BHC, alpha- and Lindane. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of HN-G1 phase II samples included: 1) BHC, alpha- and Lindane sample concentrations were estimated; 2) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL; 3) greater than 100% recovery of the DDT matrix spike; 4) less than 77% recovery of the semi-volatile matrix spike; and 5) non-confirmation of the BHC, alpha- and Lindane identifications in the quality assurance split. Sediment risk estimates. Of the 13 COC identified in the phase III HN1-G1 sediment samples (table 3), one (PCB) exceeded the NERL by 0 OM. Risk from sediment-contamination at HN1-G1 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as PCBs were identified in HN1-G1 tissue samples (figure 10). Quality control problems associated with analyses of DRI-G1 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binapthyl surrogate below the QCL in the HNS blank; 2) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL in the HN2-3 and HN4 blank; 3) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL in HN4; 4) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL in HN4 and HN6; 5) greater than 100% recovery of the PCB matrix spike in HN1; 6) detection of Lindane, Dieldrin, Endrin, and PCB in the HN5 blank; 7) detection of Dieldrin and Endrin in the HN6 blank; and 8) detection of PCB in the HN1 blank. Tissue risk estimates. DRAFT Of the five COC identified in the phase III HN1-G1 tissue samples, four exceeded tissue assessment criteria. The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Chlordane, FRBT - 0 OM; 2) Total DDT, FRBT 1 OM; 3) Dieldrin, FRBT - 1 OM; 4) PCB, VTSV - 0 OM, FRBT - 0 OM. The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the HN-G1 phase III tissue samples was 10-5 for total DDT and Dieldrin. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of HN1-G1 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the Tribromaphenol surrogate above the QCL in the HN7 crab sample; 2) recovery of the Tribromphenol surrogate below the QCL in the HN7 oyster toad sample; 3) recovery of the decachlorobiphenyl surrogate above the QCL in the HN7 crab sample; 4) recovery of the decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL in the HN7 crab sample blank; 5) recovery of the decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL in the HN7 eel, shellfish, and oyster toad blank, and the HN1 shellfish blank. DRAFT New Church Energy Associates. The New Church Energy site sampled through phase III (NCE-Gl) encompassed two areas of an unnamed tributary to Pitt's Creek. The furthest upstream area sampled was related to'a storm water discharge from NCE-G1. The second area was approximately 0.75 miles downstream at the New Church Energy 001 discharge to the unnamed tributary (Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 14 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from NCE-G1 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. The single COC identified in the phase II NCE-G1 sample, PCB, (table 3) exceeded the VHHO by 3 OM, the FHHO by 4 OM, the VALC by 1 OM, and the FALC by 1 OM (table 4). The maximum estimated risk level for the PCB identified in the NCE-G1 phase II sample was 10-2 . Quality Control problems associated with analyses of NCE-G1 phase II samples included: 1) recovery of the Decachlorobiphenyl surrogate below the QCL. Sediment risk estimates. of the eight COC identified in the phase III NCE-G1 sediment samples (table 3), two exceeded the NERL. The compounds and OM of the exceedences were: 1) DDE, 0 OM; 2) DDT, 0 OM. Risk from sediment contamination at NCE-G1 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as DDT was identified in NCE-G1 tissue samples (figure 11). Quality control problems associated with analyses of DRI-G1 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binapthyl surrogate below the QCL in the NCE301 blank; and 2) detection of Lindane, Dieldrin, Endrin, and PCB in the NCE301 blank. Tissue risk estimates. DRAFT Of the six COC identified in the phase III NCE-G1 tissue samples, three exceeded tissue assessment criteria. The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Chlordane, FRBT - O-OM; 2) DDT, FRBT -1 OM; 3) PCB, VTSV - 0 OM, FRBT - 2 OM. The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the NCE-G1 phase III tissue samples was 104 for PCB. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of NCE-Gi tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL in the NCE3 bunfish blank and NCE4 sunfish blank; 2) recovery of the decachlorobiphenyl surrogate above the QCL in the NCE3 sunfish blank and NCE4 sunfish blank; and 3) detection of Dieldrin and Endrin in the NCE3 and NCE4 sunfish blanks. Yorktown Naval Weapons Station. DRAFT The NWS-G1 site sampled through phase III (NWS-GI) encompassed the two unnamed tributaries to Roosevelt Pond. Phase II samples were collected near the head of the two tributaries. Phase III samples were collected along the length of the two tributaries .(Appendix A). Of the 39 COC, 19 were identified in phase II and phase III samples from NWS-G1 (table 3). Effluent/water risk estimates. No COC were identified in the phase II NWS-G1 samples (NWS06, NWS07) (table 3). Quality Control problems associated with analyses of NWS-G1 phase II samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binpthyl surrogate above the QCL. Sediment risk estimates. Of the 18 COC identified in the phase III NWS-G1 sediment samples (table 3), five exceeded sediment assessment values. The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Chlordane, NERL - 1 OM, NERM - 0 OM; 2) DDD, NERL - 1 OM; 3) DDT, NERL - 1 OM, NERM - 1 OM; and 4) PCB, NERL - 1 OM. Risk from sediment contamination at NWS-G1 may be inferable from the tissue risk estimates as Chlordane, DDT, and PCBs were identified in NCE-G1 tissue samples (figure 12). Quality control problems associated with analyses of NWS-G1 sediment samples included: 1) recovery of the 1,1-Binapthyl surrogate below the QCL in blanks and NWS06C; and 2) detection of Lindane, Dieldrin, Endrin, and PCB in blanks. Tissue risk estimates. DRAF7 Of the six COC identified in the phase III NKS-G1 tissue samples, three exceeded tissue assessment criteria. The compounds, standards and/or criteria exceeded, and OM of the exceedences were: 1) Chlordane, FRBT 0 OM; 2) Total DDT, FRDT -1 OM; 3) PCB, VTSV - 0 OM, FRBT 2 OM. The maximum estimated risk level for a single COC identified in the NCE-G1 phase III tissue samples was 104 for PCB. Quality Control problems associated with analyses of NCE-G1 tissue samples included: 1) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate below the QCL in the NWS06 sunfish blank and NWS07 amphibian blank; 2) recovery of the Perinapthenone surrogate above the QCL in the NWS07 amphibian sample; 3) recovery of the Tribromophenol surrogate below the QCL in the NWS06 sunfish blank, NWS07 amphibian blank, and NWS07 amphibian sample; and 4) greater than 100% recovery of semi-volatile matrix spikes in the NWSOG amphibian sample. Summary DRAFT Sources of bioconcentratable compounds in Virginia's CZM area. Phase II and phase III sample data indicate that few bioconcentratable compounds are currently being released through point and non-point source discharges. However, significant exceptions were identified in the CZM BI study. Data further indicate that sediments in the Virginia CZM area represent a substantial source of bioconcentratable compounds, apparently due to historical or episodic releases of bioconcentratable compounds. Tissue data indicate sediment related compounds are concentrating in indigenous fish and shellfish to an extent which may increases human health risks. These data suggest bioaccumulation of sediment compounds through the food chain is a more immediate problem with regard to human health risk than bioconcentration of water borne compounds. Direct correlations between water borne compounds and compounds identified in tissue samples were identified. However, their frequency of occurrence was low in relation to sediment-tissue correlations. Compounds of Concern in Virginia's CZM area. From the standpoint of indigenous fish and shellfish contamination, the halogenated compounds are of most concern. Chlordane, PCB, DDE, DDD, DDT, Endrin, and Dieldrin were the seven most common tissue contaminants identified in the study. Only two of the twelve compoundsidentified in the study's tissue samples were non-halogenated compounds. The hydrophobic, lipophilic behavior of halogenated compounds is well documented. Because of this quantitative structure activity relationship it does not require a large source of halogenated compounds to produce a significant tissue contamination problem. This phenomena is reflected in the study's sediment data where only one (PCB) of the five most commonly identified sediment contaminants is a halogenated compound. As reported above, the study was able to target 39 of the 276 compounds identified in the study as compounds of concern. The remaining 237 compounds identified in the study contained many compounds whose parent .structures were targeted as compounds of concern. However, their toxicological profiles have not been described fully enough to either include them as compounds of concern or not. Site s-pecific summaries. DRAFT, Dahl_qren Naval Weapons Lab Phase II samples from DA-G2 indicate there was an active release of Lindane, Endrin, Heptachlor, Heptachlor epoxide, and Methoxychlor. Concentrations of these compounds in the DA-G2 sample exceed one or more of Virginia's Water Quality Standards. None of the above compounds were identified in the DA-G2 sediment samp les. Endrin was identified in the DA-G2 tissue samples below tissue assessment values. Sediment concentrations of PCB, Chlordane, DDD, DDE, DDT, Dieldrin and Phenanthrene exceeded one or more sediment assessment values. PCBs, Chlordane, DDE, and Dieldrin were also identified in DA-G2 tissue samples at levels exceeding one or more tissue assessment values. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of DA-G2 COC may be low. Overall human health risks at DA-G2 were estimated at 1 0-3 for the water borne concentrations of Heptachlor and Heptachlor epoxide. Overall human health risks at DA-G2 were estimated at 10-3 for PCB levels in tissue. Additive risk for all COC at DA-G2 may be higher than 10-3. Woodbridge Research Facility WRF-G1 Phase II samples from WRF-G1 indicate there was an active release of PCBS. Concentrations of PCBs in the WRF-G1 sample exceed one or more of Virginia's Water Quality Standards. PCBs were identified in the WRF-G1 sediment samples below,sediment assessment values. -PCBs were identified in the DA-G2 tissue samples above tissue assessment values. Sediment concentrations of Chlordane, Dieldrin, and Endrin exceeded one or more sediment assessment values. Chlordane and Dieldrin were also identified in DA-G2 tissue samples at levels exceeding one or more tissue assessment values. Of the 33 COC identified in the phase II and phase III WRF-Gi samples,.23 were identified in soil samples from the old Landfill designated as site #1 in the Woodbridge Research Facility IRP. Most quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of WRF-G1 COC, specifically PCBs, may be high. Overall human health risks at WRF-G1 were estimated at 100 for the.water borne concentrations of PCB. Overall human health risks at WRF-G1 were estimated at 10-2 for PCB levels in' tissue. Additive risk for all COC at DA-G2 may be higher than 100. Woodbridge Research Facility WRF-G2. DRA" Phase II samples from WRF-G2 indicate there was an active release of PCBS. Concentrations of PCBs in the WRF-G2 sample exceed one or more of Virginia's Water Quality Standards. PCBs were identified in the WRF-G2 sediment samples above sediment assessment values. Efforts to collect tissue sample at WRF-G2 were unsuccessful. No quality control problems were associated with the WRF-G2 phase II.samples. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of WRF-G2 sediment COC, specifically PCBs, may be high. overall human health risks at WRF-G1 were estimated at 10-1 for the water borne concentrations of PCB. Additive risk for all COC at WRF-G1 may be higher than 10-1. Allied Colloids. No COC were identified in the ACL-G1 phase II samples. The ACL- G1 sediment concentrations of Chlordane, DDD, DDE, and DDT exceeded one or more of the sediment assessment values. PCBs were also identified in ACL-G1 sediment samples but below assessment values. However, PCBs were also identified in ACL-G1 tissue samples at levels exceeding tissue assessment values. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of ACL-G1 sediment COC, specifically PCBs, may be high and quantitation of ACL-G1 tissue COC may be low. Overall human health risks at ACL-G1 were estimated at 104 for PCB levels in tissue. Additive risk for all COC at ACL-G1 may be higher than 10'. Boykins Narrow Fabrics. No COC were identified in the BNF-G1 phase II samples. The BNF- G1 sediment concentrations of DDE, Dieldrin, and PCB exceeded one or more of the sediment assessment values. PCBs and DDT were identified in BNF-G1 tissue samples at levels exceeding tissue assessment values. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of BNF-G1 sediment COC, specifically PCBs, may be high and quantitation of BNF-G1 tissue COC may be low. Overall human health risks at BNF-GI were estimated at 10-5 for PCB.and DDT levels in tissue.. Additive risk for all COC at BNF- G1 may be higher than 101. Driver Naval Transmitting Facility-. DRA", Phase II samples from DRI-GI indicate there.may be an active release of PCBs from sediment associated water. Concentrations of PCBs in the DRI-G1 sample exceed one or more of Virginia's Water Quality Standards. PCBs were identified in the DRI-G1 sediment samples above sediment assessment values. PCBs were identified in the DRI-G1 tissue samples above tissue assessment values. Quality control 'and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of DRI-G1 water borne PCBs may be high and quantitation of semi-volatile COC may be low. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of DRI-G1 sediment PCBs may be high. Overall human health risks at DRI-G1 were estimated at 100 for the water borne concentrations of PCB. Overall human health risks at DRI-G1 were estimated at 10-1 for PCB levels in tissue. Additive risk for all COC at WRF-G1 may be higher than 10-1. HRSD Nansemond-STP. Phase II samples from HN-G1 indicate there was an active release of BHC, alpha- and Lindane. Concentrations of these compounds in the HN-G1 sample were estimated to exceed one or more of Virginia's Water Quality Standards. PCBs were identified in the HN1-G1 sediment samples above sediment assessment values. Chlordane, Total DDT, and Dieldrin were identified in HN1-G1 tissue samples above tissue assessment values. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of HN1-G1 water borne BHC, alpha- and Lindane were estimated and non-confirmed in a split sample. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of HN1-G1 sediment COC may be high. Overall human health risks at DRI-G1 were estimated at 10-6 for the water borne concentrations of BHC, alpha- and Lindane. Overall human health risks at DRI-G1 were estimated at 10-5 for total DDT and DIeldrin levels in tissue. Additive risk for all COC at WRF-G1 may be higher than 10'. IPMMRA@ New ChurchIEnercry Associates. DRA a r Phase II samples from NCE-G1 indicate there was an active release of PCBs. Concentrations of PCBs in the NCE-G1 sample were estimated to exceed one or more of Virginia's Water Quality Standards. No PCBs were identified in the NCE-G1 sediment samples. However, DDE and DDT were identified in the NCE-Gi sediment samples above sediment assessment values. Chlordane, total DDT, and PCBs were identified in NCE-G1 tissue samples above tissue assessment values. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of NCE-G1 water borne COC may be low. Overall human health risks at NCE-G1 were estimated at 10-2 for the water borne concentrations of PCB. Overall human health risks at NCE-G1 were estimated at 104 for PCB levels in tissue. Additive risk for all COC at NCE-G1 may be higher than 10-2. Yorktown Naval Weapons Station. No COC were identified in the NWS-G1 phase II samples. The NWS- Gi sediment concentrations of Chlordane, DDD, DDT, and PCB exceeded one or more of the sediment assessment values. Chlordane, Total DDT, and PCBs were identified in NWS-G1 tissue samples at levels exceeding tissue assessment values. Quality control and quality assurance data indicate the quantitation of NWS-G1 sediment COC, specifically PCBs/ may be high. Overall human health risks at NWS-G1 were estimated at 104 for PCB levels in tissue. Additive risk for all COC at NWS-G1 may be higher than 10'. DRAFT Table 2. Frequency of occurrence, as number of observations, of compounds detected in effluent, water, sediment, tissue, and soil under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratable compounds in the coastal zone management area of Virginia. All sites sampled Number of observations 2 CAS Compound name l Wat Sed Tis Sot 83-32-9 p Acenaphthene 0 0 0 1 208-96-8 p Acenaphthylene 0 0 0 1 877-95-2 Acetamide, N-(2-phenylethyl)- 0 0 1 0 98-86-2 Acetophenone (1-phenylethanone) 0 1 0 0 123-79-5 Adipic acid, dioctyl ester 0 1 0 0 4337-65-9 Adipic acid, (2-ethylhexyl) ester 0 1 3 0 Alcohol, C7 2 0 0 0 309-00-2 vpc Aldrin 0 1 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C9 1 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, CIO 1 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C1O-C15 4 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C15-C20 2 0 0 0 29812-79-1 Amine, O-declhydroxyl- 0 4 0 0 3091-35-8 Androstane-3,17-dione, bis-(O-methyloxime)- 0 0 2 0 120-12-7 vp Anthracene 0 7 0 2 55133-89-6 Anthracene, 9-butyltetradecahydro- 0 1 0 0 55255-70-4 Anthracene, 9-cyclohexyltetradecahydro- 0 1 0 0 27765-96-4 Anthracene, 1,4-dihydro-1,4-etheno- 0 1 0 0 55401-75-7 Anthracene, 9-dodecyltetradecahydro 0 2 0 0 613-12-7 Anthracene, 2-methyl- 0 2 0 0 84-65-1 Anthracenedione, 9,10- (Anthraquinone) 0 0 0 1 81-64-1 Anthracenedione, 1,4-dihydroxy-9,10- 0 1 0 0 12674-11-2 vpc Aroclor 1016 (PC8-1016) 0 5 2 0 11104-28-2 vpc Aroclor 1221 (PC8-1221) 1 0 0 0 11097-69-1 vpc Aroclor 1254 (PC8-1254) 0 11 1 0 11096-82-5 vpc Aroclor 1260 (PC8-1260) 3 30 44 5 Aromatic hydrocarbon 1 0 0 0 3691-12-1 Azulene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7 (l-methylethenyl) 0 4 0 0 90-60-8 Benzaldehyde, 3,5-dichloro-2-hydroxy- 0 2 0 0 90-02-8 Benzaldehyde, 2-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 123-08-0 Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy- 0 2 0 0 121-33-5 Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy- 0 5 0 0 3376-32-7 Benzaldehyde, o-methyloxime- 0 1 0 0 56-55-3 vp Benz[a]anthracene 0 29 0 2 57-97-6 Benz[a]anthracene, 7,12-dimethyl- 0 2 0 0 2498-76-2 Benz[a]anthracene, 2-methyl- 0 1 0 0 2381-31-9 Benz[a]anthracene, 8-methyL- 0 0 1 0 82-05-3 Benz[de]anthracen-7-one, 7H- 0 0 0 1 612-64-6 Benzenamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso- 2 1 0 0 1 V=VA. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaiminent, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil Table 2 continued. ALL sites sampled DRAFT Number of observations CAS Compound name1 Wat Sed Tis Sol 2524-67-6 Benzenamine, 4-(4-morpholinyl)- 0 0 1 0 74672-05-2 Benzene, 1(1,3-dimethyl-3-butenyl)-4-methoxy- 0 5 0 0 611-15-4 Benzene, 1-ethenyl-2-methyl 1 0 0 0 74810-75-6 Benzene, 3-ethenyl-5,5-dimethylhexyl- 0 0 1 0 3299-05-6 Benzene, 1-ethoxyethyl- 0 1 0 0 768-00-3 Benzene, (1-methyl-1-propenyl)- 1 0 0 0 42524-30-1 Benzene, 3-methyl-4-pentenyl- 0 1 0 0 2719-62-2 Benzene, 1-pentylheptyl- 0 1 0 0 98-82-8 Benzene, (2-propyl)- (cumene) 1 0 0 0 527-53-7 Benzene, 1,2,3,5-tetramethyl- 1 0 0 0 95-63-6 Benzene, 1,2,4-trimethyl- 1 0 0 0 108-67-8 Benzene, 1,3,5-trimethyl- 2 0 0 0 41182-85-8 Benzenecarboximidoyl bromide, N-methyl- 1 0 0 0 39563-50-3 Benzenediamine, N-(1-methylhepty)-1,4- 0 1 0 0 2-96-60-8 Benzenediol,4-ethyl-1,3- 1 0 0 0 13398-94-2 Benzeneethanol, 3-hydroxy- 0 0 2 0 319-84-6 pc Benzenehexachloride, alpha- (alpha-BHC; alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane) 1 0 0 0 319-85-7 pc Benzenehexachloride, beta- (beta-BHC; beta-hexachlorocyclohexane) 0 1 0 0 319-86-8 p Benzenehexachloride, delta- (delta-BHC; delta-hexachlorocyclohexane) 0 0 0 1 58-89-9 vpc Benzenehexachloride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane; 2 0 1 0 6639-57-2 Benzenethiazolecarboxaldehyde, 2- 0 1 0 0 2622-67-5 Benzimidazole, 1,2-diphenyl -1m 0 0 1 0 4173-59-5 Benzoate, 2-phenoxyethanol- 0 0 0 1 19195-17-6 Benzo[c]cinnoline, 2-ethoxy- 0 1 0 0 94-58-6 Benzodioxole, 5-propyl-1,3- 0 0 1 0 205-99-2 vp Benzo[b]fluoranthene (benz[e]acephenanthrylene) 0 38 0 3 205-82-3 Benzo[j]fLuoranthene 0 11 0 2 207-08-9 vp Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0 19 0 2 238-84-6 Benzo[a]fluorene 0 3 0 1 243-17-4 Benzo[b]fluorene 0 1 0 0 14039-91-2 Benzofurandione, 4-(p-hydroxybenzyl)-6-methoxy-2,3- 0 0 1 0 65-85-0 Benzoic acid 0 0 0 1 191-24-2 p Benzo[ghi]perylene 0 7 0 2 195-19-7 Benzo[c]phenanthrene 0 0 0 2 24126-93-0 Benzopyran-4-one, 3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-6,7-dimethoxy-4H-1- 0 1 0 0 50-32-8 vp Benzo[a]pyrene 0 21 1 2 57652-66-1 Benzo[a]pyrene, 4,5-dihydro- 0 0 1 0 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 0 1 0 1 934-34-9 Benzothiazol-2-one, 3H- 0 1 0 0 215-58-7 Benzo[b]triphenylene 0 1 0 0 40458-77-3 Bicyclo[3.2.1]oct-6-en-3-one,8-oxa- 0 1 0 0 13049-35-9 Biphenyl, 2,2'-diethyl- 0 4 0 0 1 V=VA. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federal contaminent of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 continued. DRAFT AIL sites sampled Number of observations2 CAS Compound nameI Wat Sed Tis Sot 507-45-9 Butane, 2,3-dichloro-2-methyL- 0 0 0 3 122-57-6 But-3-en-2-one, 4-phenyL- 0 0 2 0 105-60-2 Caprolactam 1 0 0 0 Carbon, total organic 0 67 0 8 5103-71-9 vpc Chtordane, aLpha- (cis-chLordane) 0 13 29 0 5103-74-2 vpc Chlordane, gamma- (trans-chLordane) 0 12 12 1 Chlorinated hydrocarbon 2 0 0 0 vpc ChlorobiphenyL, poty- 6 0 0 0 40071-70-3 ChoLestane, (5-atpha, 14-beta) 0 1 0 0 218-01-9 vp Chrysene 0 35 0 2 3351-31-3 Chrysene, 3-methyL- 0 2 0 1 470-82-6 CineoLe, 1,8- 0 1 0 0 53327-11-0 Cyanobenzoic acid, 4-, 3-methoxyphenyt ester 0 0 1 0 53327-12-1 Cyanobenzoic acid, 4-, 4-methoxyphenyt ester 0 0 2 0 55044-32-1 Cyclohexane, 1-11-(oxydi-2,1-ethanediyt)bis[4-methyt- 0 1 0 0 CycLohexanedione, 2,21-methytenebis[5,5-dimethyL-1,3- 0 1 0 0 13828-37-0 CycLohexanemethanoL, cis-0-methylethyt)- 0 0 1 0 13491-79-7 Cyclohexanot, 2-(1,1-dimethytethyl)- 0 4 0 2 540-97-6 CycLohexasitoxane, dodecamethyt- 1 0 0 0 13898-73-2 CycLohexene, 1-methyL-5-Cl-methytethenyt)- 0 0 1 0 5256-65-5 Cyclohexene, 3-methyL-6-(1-methyLethyL)- 0 0 1 0 6376-92-7 CycLopentanone, 2-(1-methytpropyL)- 1 0 0 0 203-64-5 Cyciopenta[def3phenanthrene, 4H- 0 2 0 2 541-02-6 CycLopentasitoxane, decamethyl- 1 0 0 0 17384-72-4 CycLopent[alindene, 3,8-dihydro-1,2,3,3,8,8-hexamethyt- 0 0 1 0 72-54-8 vpc DDD, 4,41- (p,p'-DDD) 0 27 36 4 3424-82-6 v DDE, 2,41-.(o,pl-DDE) 0 0 1 0 72-55-9 vpc DDE, 4,41- (p,pl-DDE) 0 33 46 2 50-29-3 vpc DDT, 4,41- (p,p'-DDT) 0 27 18 3 25152-84-5 Deca-2,4-dienat, (E,E)- 0 0 18 0 62237-99-4 Decane, 2,2,7-trimethyL- 1 0 0 0 334-48-5 Decanoic acid 0 4 0 0 5746-58-7 Decanoic acid, 12-methyttetra- 0 1 0 0 21078-65-9 Decanot, 2-ethyL- 0 14 0 0 7320-37-8 Decytoxirane, tetra- 0 0 0 1 53-70-3 vp Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0 3 0 1 60-57-1 vpc DieLdrin 0 9 6 0 Diketone, C10-C15- 0 81 0 20 507633-63-3 Dioxaboro0lane, 2,4-d0imethy4L-1,3,2- 01 0 01 0 74793-11-6 Dioxotane, 2-cyc0tohexy0t-4,5-d8imethy0L-1,3- 0 0 01 00 935-45-5 D4ioxo8tane, 2-ethy0t-2-isobutyL-1,3- 0 0 01 0 4362-18-9 Dioxo4tane, 2-methy0t-2-8(pheny4tmethyL4)-1,3- 0 0 41 40 41 V=Va. water uality standard, p=federa0t priority contaminant, c=federaL contaminant of concern. 22 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, SoL=soiL. Table 2 continued. DRAFT All sites sampled Number of observations2 CAS Compound name1 Wat Sed Tis Sol 21662-16-8 Dodecadienal, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 1120-16-7 Dodecanamide 0 1 2 0 3891-98-3 Dodecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl- 1 0 0 0 143-07-7 Dodecanoic acid 0 2 0 0 120-40-1 Dodecylamine, N,N-di-(2-hydroxyethyl)- 0 1 0 0 959-98-8 vp Endosulfan I (alpha-endosulfan) 0 3 0 0 33213-65-9 vp Endosulfan II (beta-endosulfan) 0 1 0 0 1031-07-8 vp Endosulfan sulfate 0 2 0 1 72-20-8 vp Endrin 1 3 10 0 7421-93-4 p Endrin aldehyde 0 1 3 0 Ester, C8 2 0 0 0 10224-91-6 Ethane, 1,1-bis(p-ethylphenyl)- 0 2 0 0 93-56-1 Ethanediot, 1-phenyl-1,2- 0 0 1 0 69078-80-4 Ethanethioic acid, S-(2-methylethyl) ester 0 0 1 0 124-17-4 Ethanol, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)-, acetate 0 0 0 1 60-12-8 Ethanol, 2-phenyl- 0 0 2 0 551-93-9 Ethanone, 1(-2-aminophenyl)- 0 1 0 0 99-03-6 Ethanone, 1-(3-aminophenyl)- 0 0 1 0 Extractable organic compound, UID 2 21 35 0 206-44-0 vp Fluoranthene 0 48 0 5 86-73-7 vp FLuorene 0 2 0 2 17108-52-0 Furan, 2,3-dihydro-2,5-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 3777-69-3 Furan, 2-pentyl- 0 1 0 0 2407-43-4 Furanone, 5-ethyl-2(5H)- 0 0 1 0 51262-24-9 Gona-1,3,5,7,9-pentaen-17-one, 13-ethyl-3-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 76-44-8 vpc Heptachlor 1 0 1 0 1024-57-3 pc Heptachlor-epoxide 1 2 0 0 54105-67-8 Heptadecane, 2,6-dimethyl- 1 0 0 0 2922-51-2 Heptadecanone 0 1 0 0 59782-31-9 Heptadecylthiophene, 2- 0 1 0 0 4313-03-5 Hepta-2,4-dienal, (E,E)- 0 0 2 0 2432-82-8 Heptanethioic acid, S-methyl ester 0 0 1 0 41654-23-3 Heptenoic acid, 2-, 3-(l-methylethyl)-6-oxo-methyl ester 1 0 0 0 629-80-1 Nexadecanat 0 3 0 0 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 1 0 0 0 38701-07-4 Hexadienoic acid,2,3-, 2-methyl-4-phenylethyl ester 0 1 0 0 111-49-9 Hexahydro-1H-azepine 0 0 1 0 5932-91-2 Hexanal, 4,4-dimethyl- 0 3 0 0 16747-30-1 Hexane, 2,4,4-trimethyl- 1 0 0 0 103-23-1 Nexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethyLhexyl) ester 0 18 0 4 37052-13-4 Imidazol-2-amine, IH-phenanthro[9,10-D] 0 3 11 0 3034-42-2 Imidazole, 1-methyt-5-nitroq-lH- 0 0 3 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federat priority contaminant, c=federat contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 continued. All sites sampled DRAFT Number of observations2 CAS Compound namel Wat Sed Tis Sol 696-23-1 Imidazole, 2-methyl-4-nitro-IH- 0 0 5 0 616-04-6 imidazolinedione, 1-methyL-2,4- 0 0 1 0 4912-92-9 Indene, 2,3-dihydro-1,1-dimethyl-IH- 0 1 0 0 193-39-5 vp Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0 10 0 2 62108-16-1 Indole, 2,3-dihydro-4-methyl-lH- 0 2 0 0 4757-69-1 Indole, 2-methyl-3-phenyl-lH- 0 1 0 0 1761-10-0 Indolizine, 3-methyl- 0 2 0 0 13618-93-4 Indolizine, octahydro- 0 0 1 0 119-38-0 Isolan 0 0 1 0 138-86-3 Limonene 0 33 55 1 Lipid content, percent 0 0 64 0 12427-38-2 Maneb 0 1 0 0 72-43-5 v Methoxychtor 1 0 0 0 Moisture content, percent 0 67 64 8 91-20-3 p Naphthalene 0 2 0 2 473-13-2 Naphthalene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-2-(1-methytethenyl)- 0 1 0 0 61-94-2 Naphthalene, 2-phenyl- 0 2 0 0 2131-41-1 Naphthalene, 1,4,5-trimethyt- 0 1 0 0 118-46-7 Naphthalenol, 8-amino-2- 0 1 5 0 22738-31-4 Naphthalenone, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyL-2(IH)- 0 1 0 0 6831-17-0 Naphthalen-2-one, octahydro-2H-cycLopropa[a]- 0 1 0 0 16587-34-1 Naphtho(2,3-d)thlophene, 4,9-dimethyt- 0 1 0 0 586-96-9 Nitrosobenzene 0 0 1 0 5910-87-2 NonadienaL, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 3 0 1120-07-6 Nonanamide 2 6 8 0 5129-63-5 Nonanoic acid, 7-methyL-, methyt ester 0 0 0 1 646-13-9 Octadecanoic acid, 2-methytpropyl ester 2 0 0 0 56554-96-2 Octadecenat, 2- 1 0 0 0 56554-91-7 Octadecenat, 12- 0 0 0 1 301-02-0 Octadecenamide, (Z)-9- 1 8 0 1 140-03-4 Octadecenoic acid, IR-(Z)1-12-(acetytoxy)-9-, methyt ester 0 0 3 0 30361-28-5 Octadienal, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 16754-48-6 Orthoformic acid, tri-sec-butyL ester 0 0 4 0 15769-89-8 Oxzine, tetrahydro-2-methyt-6-phenyt-2H-1,2- 0 0 1 0 1002-84-2 Pentadecanoic acid 0 4 0 0 502-69-2 Pentadecanone, 6,10,14-trimethyt-2- 0 2 0 0 626-97-1 Pentanamide 0 0 1 0 1119-29-5 Pentanamqide, 4-methyl- 0 0 3 0 19398-53-9 Pentane, 2,4-dibromo- 1 0 0 0 74685-46-4 Pentanot, 2-chloro-4-methyL-3- 0 11 0 1 292-46-6 Pentathiepane, 1,2,3,5,6- (Lenthionine) 0 1 0 0 3160-32-5 Penten-3-one, 4-methyl-1-phenyl-l- 0 1 0 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 continued. DRAFT ALL sites sampled Number of observations2 CAS Compound name Wat Sed Tis Sol 85-01-8 p Phenanthrene 0 26 0 2 55125-03-6 Phenanthrene, 3,9-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)- 0 3 0 0 55334-01-5 Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyltetradecahydro- 0 10 0 0 2531-84-2 Phenanthrene, 2-methyl- 0 5 0 2 832-71-3 Phenanthrene, 3-methyl- 0 2 0 1 832-64-4 Phenanthrene, 4-methyl- 0 1 0 0 883-20-5 Phenanthrene, 9-methyl- 0 0 0 2 7396-38-5 Phenanthrene, 2,4,5,7-tetramethyl- 0 1 0 0 24035-50-5 Phenanthrenecarboxyatdehyde, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-1- 0 4 1 0 7715-44-8 Phenanthrenone, decahydro-1,1,4A,7,7-pentamethyl-2(lH)- 0 6 0 0 85-60-9 Phenol, 4,41-butytidene bis[2-(I,I-dimethyL)-5-methyl- 4 5 0 0 26967-65-7 Phenol, diethyl- 0 1 0 0 5635-50-7 Phenol, 4,41-(1,2-diethyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis- 0 10 1 0 108-39-4 Phenol, 3-methyt- (m-cresol) 0 1 0 0 106-44-5 Phenol, 4-methyl- (p-cresol) 0 3 0 0 128-37-0 Phenol, 4-methyl-2,6-di-(t-butyl)- 0 0 1 0 88-24-4 Phenol, 2,21-methylenebis[6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-ethyl- 0 10 1 0 25154-52-3 Phenol, nonyl- 0 4 0 0 104-40-5 Phenot, 4-nonyl- 0 11 1 1 140-66-9 Phenot, 4-(1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- 0 14 0 3 54932-78-4 Phenol, 4-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- 0 16 1 1 635-51-8 Phenylbutanedioic acid 0 1 0 0 2613-89-0 Phenylpropanedioic acid 0 0 1 0 117-82-8 Phthalic acid, bis(2-methoxyethyl) ester 0 14 2 0 17851-53-5 Phthatic acid, butyl isobutyt ester 0 8 3 2 84-74-2 p Phthalic acid, di-(n-butyl) ester 1 0 0 0 84-66-2 p Phthatic acid, diethyt ester 1 0 1 0 117-81-7 vp Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethythexyl) ester (bis(2-ethythext)phthatate) 3 0 0 0 603-11-2 Phthatic acid, 3-nitro- 0 10 5 0 150-86-7 Phytot 0 7 0 0 675-20-7 Piperidin-2-one 0 0 2 0 30893-20-0 Propanamine, N-methyl-N-nitro-2- 0 0 1 0 74367-33-2 Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 0 10 0 3 55759-91-6 Propenat, 3-(2,2,6-trimethyt-7-oxabicycLo[4,1,0]hept-1-yl)-2- 2 0 0 0 23230-88-8 Propene, 3-t-butoxy-2-(isopropoxymethyl)- 0 1 0 1 501-52-0 Propionic acid, 3-phenyl- 0 0 1 0 5386-10-2 PropyLate, chtoro- (ACN) 0 1 0 0 26325-06-4 Purin-6-yi, N-phenyt-N-1H- 0 0 1 0 18138-05-1 Pyrazine, 3,5-diethyl-2-methyl- 0 0 1 0 1124-11-4 Pyrazine, tetramethyt- 0 0 1 0 129-00-0 vp Pyrene 0 47 0 3 64401-21-4 Pyrene, 1,3-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 1 V=Va. water quatity standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federat contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 - continued. DRAFT All sites sampled Number of observations2 CAS Compound name Wat Sed Tis Sol 2381-21-7 Pyrene, 1-methyl- 0 1 0 1 3442-78-2 Pyrene, 2-methyl- 0 1 0 2 3029-19-4 1-Pyrenecarboxaldehyde 0 0 0 1 23003-22-7 Pyridinethione, 3-hydroxy-2(lN)- 0 0 3 0 20189-42-8 Pyrrolidinedione, 3-ethylidene-4-methyl-2,5- 0 1 0 0 872-50-4 Pyrrolidin-2-one, N-methyl- 1 0 0 0 13435-09-1 Sitanediamine, 1,1-dimethyl-n-n-diphenyl- 2 0 0 0 601-58-1 Stigmastane 0 1 0 0 Sulfur, acid volatile 0 67 0 8 19812-64-7 Tetradecane-1,14-diot 0 2 0 0 544-63-8 Tetradecanoic acid 0 1 0 0 483-77-2 TetraLin, 1,6-dimethyt-4-(2-propyt)- 0 2 0 0 292-45-5 Tetrathqiepane, 1,2,4,6- 0 1 0 0 5285-87-0 Thiocyanic acid, phenyt ester 0 1 0 0 23966-59-8 Totuamide, atpha-(I-hydroxycyclohexyt)-o- 0 0 1 0 56666-50-3 Tricyclo[2.2.01,43heptan-2-one, 6-nitro- 0 1 1 0 638-53-9 Tridecanoic acid 0 1 0 0 6006-01-5 Tridecatrienenitrite, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- 0 30 59 1 36237-69-1 Tridecatrienoic acid, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11-, methyl ester 0 0 1 0 217-59-4 Triphenytene 0 1 0 0 289-16-7 Trithiotane, 1,2,4- 0 2 0 0 30361-29-6 Undecadienat, (E,Eq)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 180-43-8 Undecane, spiro[5,51- 1 0 0 0 112-37-8 Undecanoic acid 0 1 0 0 74630-38-9 Undecene, 5-methyl-1- 2 0 0 0 58-95-7 Vitamin E acetate (VAN) 0 0 1 0 95-47-6 Xylene, o-(1,2-dimethylbenzene) 1 0 0 0 ALL Number compounds detected:3 4 53 158 92 59 276 Number compounds with Va. water quality standards detected: 7 23 13 16 29 Number federal priority contaminants observed:4 10 30 14 23 40 Number EPA contaminants of concern observed: 4 15 611 10 5 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federaL priority contaminant, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sot=soil. 3 Aroctors, DDT products, Chlordane isomers counted separately. 4 Aroctors, DDT products counted separately; Chtordane isomers grouped as one. Table 2 - continued. DRAFT Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region Number of observations2 CAS Compound namel Wat Sed Tis Sol 83-32-9 pAcenaphthene 0 0 0 1 208-96-8 pAcenaphthytene 0 0 0 1 877-95-2 Acetamide, N-(2-phenytethyL)- 0 0 1 0 4337-65-9 Adipic acid, (2-ethythexyl) ester 0 1 3 0 Alcohol, C7 2 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C9 1 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, CIO 1 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, CIO-CI5 4 0 0 0 Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C15-C20 2 0 0 0 120-12-7 vp Anthracene 0 3 0 2 55133-89-6 Anthracene, 9-butyttetradecahydro- 0 1 0 0 55255-70-4 Anthracene, 9-cyclohexyLtetradecahydro- 0 1 0 0 27765-96-4 Anthracene, 1,4-dihydro-1,4-etheno- 0 1 0 0 55401-75-7 Anthracene, 9-dodecyLtetradecahydro- 0 2 0 0 613-12-7 Anthracene, 2-methyl- 0 1 0 0 84-65-1 Anthracenedione, 9,10- (Anthraquinone) 0 0 0 1 12674-11-2 vpc ArocLor 1016 (PCB-1016) 0 2 1 0 11097-69-1 vpc Aroclor 1254 (PCB-1254) 0 8 1 0 11096-82-5 vpc ArocLor 1260 4pCB-1260) 2 12 34 5 Aromatic hydrocarbon 1 0 0 0 3691-12-1 Azutene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyt-7-(l-methytethenyL)- 0 2 0 0 90-60-8 BenzaLdehyde, 3,5-dichloro-2-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 123-08-0 Benzaidehyde, 4-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 121-3375 Benzatdehyde, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy- 0 2 0 0 56-55-3 vp Benz[a3anthracene 0 13 0 2 57-97-6 Benz[alanthracene, 7,12-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 2498-76-2 Benz[alanthracene, 2-methyl- 0 1 0 0 82-05-3 BenzCdelanthracen-7-one, 7H- 0 0 0 1 2524-67-6 Benzenamine, 4-(4-morphotinyt)- 0 0 1 0 74672-05-2 Benzene, 1-(1,3-dimethyt-3-butenyt)-4-methoxy- 0 1 0 0 611-15-4 Benzene, 1-ethenyt-2-methyl 1 0 0 0 74810-75-6 Benzene, 3-ethenyL-5,5-dimethythexyL- 0 0 1 0 3299-05-6 Benzene, I-ethoxyethyt- 0 1 0 0 768-00-3 Benzene, (1-methyL-1-propenyL)- 1 0 0 0 2719-62-2 Benzene, I-pentytheptyt- 0 1 0 0 98-82-8 Benzene, (2-propyt)- (cumene) 1 0 0 0 527-53-7 Benzene, 1,2,3,5-tetramethyt- 1 0 0 0 95-63-6 Benzene, 1,2,4-trimethyt- 1 0 0 0 10867-8 Benzene, 1,3,5-trqimethyt- 2 0 0 0 13398-94-2 BenzeneethanoL, 3-hydroxy- 0 0 2 0 319-85-7 pc Benzenehexachloride, beta- (beta-BHC; beta-hexachtorocyctohexane) 0 1 0 0 319-86-8 p BenzenehexachoLoride, deLta- (deLta-BHC; delta-hexachtorocyctohexane) 0 0 0 1 21 V--Va. water quality standard, p=federaL priority contaminant, c=federat contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Tabte 2 - continued. DRAFT Va. Dept. of Environmentat Quatity's Northern Region Number of observations2 CAS Compound name1 Wat Sed Tis SoL 58-89-9 vpc BenzenehexachLoride, gamma- (gamm-BHC; gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane; 1 0 0 0 2622-67-5 Benzimidazote, 1,2-diphenyt-lH- 0 0 1 0 4173-59-5 Benzoate, 2-phenoxyethanoL- 0 0 0 1 94-58-6 Benzodioxote, 5-propyt-1,3- 0 0 1 0 205-99-2 vp BenzoEb3ftuoranthene (benz{e}cephenanthryLene) 0 16 0 3 205-82-3 BenzoEilftuoranthene 0 4 0 2 207-08-9 vp Benzo[klftuoranthene 0 11 0 2 238-84-6 Benzo[alfluorene 0 3 0 1 243-17-4 Benzo[blftuorene 0 1 0 0 14039-91-2 Benzofurandione, 4-(p-hydroxybenzyt)-6-methoxy-2,3- 0 0 1 0 65-85-0 Benzoic acid 0 0 0 1 191-24-2 p Benzo[ghilperylene 0 3 0 2 195-19-7 Benzo(clphenanthrene 0 0 0 2 24126-93-0 Benzopyran-4-one, 3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyL)-6,7-dimethoxy-4H-1- 0 1 0 0 50-32-8 vp Benzo[alpyrene 0 11 1 2 57652-66-1 Benzo[a3pyrene, 4,5-dihydro- 0 0 1 0 192-97-2 Benzo[e3pyrene 0 0 0 1 934-34-9 Benzothiazot-2-one, 3H- 0 1 0 0 215-58-7 8enzo[bitriphenyLene 0 1 0 0 13049-35-9 Biphenyl, 2,21-diethyt- 0 3 0 0 507-45-9 Butane, 2,3-dichLoro-2-methyt- 0 0 0 3 122-57-6 But-3-en-2-one, 4-phenyt- 0 0 2 0 Carbon, totat organic 0 26 0 8 5103-71-9 vpc Chlordane, atpha- (cis-chlordane) 0 6 25 0 5103-74-2 vpc Chtordane, gamma- (trans-chlordane) 0 5 12 1 vpc ChtorobiphenyL, poty- 2 0 0 0 40071-70-3 Chotestane, (5-atpha, 14-beta) 0 1 0 0 218-01-9 vp Chrysene 0 16 0 2 3351-31-3 Chrysene, 3-methyt- 0 2 0 1 53327-12-1 Cyanobenzoic acid, 4-, 4-methoxyphenyt ester 0 0 2 0 55044-32-1 CycLohexane, 1-11-(oxydi-2,1-ethanediyi)bis[4-methyt- 0 1 0 0 2181-22-8 Cyctohexanedione, 2i2-methyLenebis[5,5-dimethyt-1,3- 0 1 0 0 13491-79-7 Cyc(ohexanot, 2-(1,1-dimethyLethyt)- 0 0 0 2 13898-73-2 Cyctohexene, 1-methyt-5-(I-methyLethenyt)- 0 0 1 0 5256-65-5 Cyc(ohexene, 3-methyt-6-(I-methylethyL)- 0 0 1 0 203-64-5 Cyctopenta[deflphenanthrene, 4H- 0 2 0 2 72-54-8 vpc DDD, 4,41- (p,pl-DDD) 0 13 27 4 3424-82-6 v DDE, 2,41- (o,pl-DDE) 0 0 1 0 72-55-9 vpc DDE, 4,41- (p,pl-DDE) 0 15 30 2 50-29-3 vpc DDT, 4,41- (p,pl-DDT) 0 12 14 3 25152-84-5 Deca-2,4-dienat, (E,E)- 0 0 10 0 334-48-5 Decanoic acid 0 2 0 0 I V=Va. water quaLity standard, p=federaL priority contaminant, c=federat contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effLuent, Sed-sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soit. TabLe 2 continued. DRAFT Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region Number of 2 observations CAS Compound name1 Wat Sed Tis SoL 7320-37-8 Decytoxirane, tetra- 0 0 0 1 53-70-3 vp Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0 2 0 1 60-57-1 vpc Dietdrin 0 7 5 0 21662-16-8 Dodecadienat, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 1120-16-7 Dodecanamide 0 0 2 0 120-40-1 DodecyLamine, N,N-di-(2-hydroxyethyL)- 0 1 0 0 959-98-8 vp EndosuLfan I Catpha-endosutfan) 0 2 0 0 33213-65-9 vp Endosutfan 11 (beta-endosutfan) 0 1 0 0 1031-07-8 vp Endosutfan suLfate 0 2 0 1 72-20-8 vp Endrin 1 3 10 0 7421-93-4 p Endrin aLdehyde 0 1 3 0 Ester, C8 2 0 0 0 69078-80-4 Ethanethioic acid, S-(2-methytethyt) ester 0 0 1 0 124-17-4 EthanoL, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)-, acetate 0 0 0 1 60-12-8 EthanoL, 2-phenyt- 0 0 2 0 99-03-6 Ethanone, 1-(3-aminophenyL)- 0 0 1 0 Extractabte organic compound, UID 0 12 19 0 206-44-0 vp FLuoranthene 0 20 0 5 86-73-7 vp FLuorene 0 2 0 2 3777-69-3 Furan, 2-pentyt- 0 1 0 0 51262-24-9 Gona-1,3,5,7,9-pentaen-17-one, 13-ethyL-3-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 76-44-8 vpc Heptachtor 1 0 0 0 1024-57-3 pc HeptachLor epoxide 1 1 0 0 4313-03-5 Hepta-2,4-dienaL, CE,E)- 0 0 2 0 2432-82-8 Heptanethioic acid, S-methyl ester 0 0 1 0 111-49-9 flexahydro-lH-azepine 0 0 1 0 16747-30-1 Hexane, 2,4,4-trimethyL- 1 0 0 0 103-23-1 Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethythexyL) ester 0 8 0 4 37052-13-4 imidazol-2-amine, 1H-phenanthro[9,10-D] 0 1 7 0 3034-42-2 Imidazote, 1-methyL-5-nitro-lH- 0 0 3 0 696-23-1 Imidazote, 2-methyL-4-nitro-lH- 0 0 3 0 616-04-6 lmidazoLinedione, 1-methyL-2,4- 0 0 1 0 193-39-5 vp Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0 5 0 2 4757-69-1 IndoLe, 2-methyt-3-phenyL-lH- 0 1 0 0 1761-10-0 IndoLizine, 3-methyt- 0 1 0 0 13618-93-4 IndoLizine, octahydro- 0 0 1 0 119-38-0 IsoLan 0 0 1 0 138-86-3 Limonene 0 12 31 1 Lipid content, percent 0 0 37 0 72-43-5 v MethoxychLor 1 0 0 0 Moisture content, percent 0 26 37 8 91-20-3 p Naphthatene 0 1 0 2 1 V=Va. water quaLty standard, p=federat priority contaminant, c=federaL contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or-effLuent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, SoL=soL. Table 2 - continued. DRAFT Va. Dept. of Environmentat Quality's Northern Region Number of observations2 CAS Compound namel Wat Sed Tis Sot 612-94-2 Naphthalene, 2-phenyt- 0 1 0 0 2131-41-1 Naphthalene, 1,4,5-trimethyl- 0 1 0 0 118-46-7 NaphthaLenot, 8-amino-2- 0 1 4 0 586-96-9 Nitrosobenzene 0 0 1 0 5910-87-2 Nonadienat, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 1120-07-6 Nonanamide 0 4 7 0 5129-63-5 Nonanoic acid, 7-methyt-, methyt ester 0 0 0 1 56554-91-7 Octadecenat, 12- 0 0 0 1 301-02-0 Octadecenamide, (Z)-9- 0 4 0 1 140-03-4 Octadecenoic acid, [R-(Z)1-12-(acetytoxy)-9-, methyl ester 0 0 3 0 30361-28-5 Octadienal, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 16754-48-6 Orthoformic acid, tri-sec-butyL ester 0 0 2 0 626-97-1 Pentanamide 0 0 1 0 1119-29-5 Pentanamide, 4-methyl- 0 0 1 0 19398-53-9 Pentane, 2,4-dibromo- 1 0 0 0 74685-46-4 PentanoL, 2-chtoro-4-methyt-3- 0 0 0 1 3160-32-5 Penten-3-one, 4-methyt-l-phenyt-- 0 1 0 0 85-01-8 p Phenanthrene 0 11 0 2 55334-01-5 Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyLtetradecahydro- 0 2 0 0 2531-84-2 Phenanthrene, 2-methyt- 0 2 0 2 832-71-3 Phenanthrene, 3-methyl- 0 2 0 1 883-20-5 Phenanthrene, 9-methyt- 0 0 0 2 7396-38 Phenanthrene, 2,4,5,7-tetramethyl- 0 1 0 0 24035-50-5 Phenanthrenecarboxyaldehyde, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyt-l- 0 1 0 0 7715-44-8 Phenanthrenone, decahydro-1,1,4A,7,7-pentamethyL-2(lH)- 0 2 0 0 5635-50-7 Phenol, 4,41-(1,2-diethyt-1,2-ethanediyL)bis- 0 1 1 0 106-44-5 Phenol, 4-methyt- (p-cresot) 0 1 0 0 128-37-0 Phenol, 4-methyL-2,6-di-(t-butyt)- 0 0 1 0 88-24-4 Phenol, 2,21-methytenebis[6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-ethyt- 0 7 0 0 25154-52-3 Phenol, nonyt- 0 3 0 0 104-40-5 Phenol, 4-nonyL- 0 5 1 1 140-66-9 Phenol, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyt)- 0 6 0 3 54932-78-4 Phenol, 4-(2,2,3,3-tetramethyLbutyL)- 0 8 1 1 635-51-8 Phenytbutanedioic acid 0 1 0 0 2613-89-0 Phenylpropanedioic acid 0 0 1 0 117-82-8 Phthatic acid, bis(2-methoxyethyt) ester 0 5 2 0 17851-53-5 PhtfiaLic acid, butyt isobutyt ester 0 6 2 2 84-66-2 p Phthalic acid, diethyL ester 1 0 0 0 117-81-7 vp Phthatic acid, di-(2-ethythexyL) ester (bis(2-ethythexL)phthatate) 1 0 0 0 603-112 Phthatic acid, 3-nitro- 0 4 5 0 150-86-7 Phytot 0 5 0 0 30893-20-0 Propanamine, N-methyL-N-nitro-2- 0 0 1 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federat priority contaminant, c=federat contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sot=sol. Table 2 continued. Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region DRAFT Number of observations2 CAS Compound namel Wat Sed Tis Sol 74367-33-2 Propanoic acid, 2-methytl, 0 2 0 3 23230-88-8 Propene, 3-t-butoxy-2-(isopropoxymethyl)- 0 0 0 1 501-52-0 Propionic acid, 3-phenyl- 0 0 1 0 5386-10-2 Propylate, chloro- (ACN) 0 1 0 0 26325-06-4 Purin-6-yl, N-phenyl-N'-IH- 0 0 1 0 18138-05-1 Pyrazine, 3,5-diethyl-2-methyl- 0 0 1 0 1124-11-4 Pyrazine, tetramethyl- 0 0 1 0 129-00-0 vp Pyrene 0 20 0 3 64401-21-4 Pyrene, 1,3-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 2381-21-7 Pyrene, 1-methyl- 0 1 0 1 3442-78-2 Pyrene, 2-methyl- 0 1 0 2 3029-19-4 1-Pyrenecarboxaldehyde 0 0 0 1 23003-22-7 Pyridinethione, 3-hydroxy-2(1H)- 0 0 3 0 20189-42-8 Pyrrolidinedione, 3-ethylidene-4-methyt-2,5- 0 1 0 0 601-58-1 Stigmastane 0 1 0 0 Sulfur, acid volatile 0 26 0 8 483-77-2 Tetralin, 1,6-dimethyl-4-(2-propyl)- 0 2 0 0 5285-87-0 Thiocyanic acid, phenyl ester 0 1 0 0 23966-59-8 Toluamide, alpha-(1-hydroxycyclohexyl)-o- 0 0 1 0 56666-50-3 Tricyclo[2.2.01,4]heptan-2-one, 6-nitro- 0 1 1 0 6006-01-5 Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- 0 11 35 1 36237-69-1 Tridecatrienoic acid, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11-, methyl ester 0 0 1 0 217-59-4 Triphenylene 0 1 0 0 289-16-7 Trithiolane, 1,2,4- 0 1 0 0 30361-29-6 Undecadienal, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 1 0 112-37-8 Undecanoic acid 0 1 0 0 58-95-7 Vitamin E acetate (VAN) 0 0 1 0 95-47-6 Xyene, o- (1,2-dimethylbenzene) 1 0 0 0 ALL Number compounds detected:3 25 108 74 59 200 Number compounds with Va. water quality standards detected:4 6 22 11 16 27 Number federal priority contaminants observed:4 7 29 11 23 36 Number EPA contaminants of concern observed:4 4 10 8 5 5 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. 3 Aroclors, DDT products, Chlordane isomers counted separately. 4 Aroclors, DDT products counted separately; Chlordane isomers grouped as one. Table 2 - continued. DRAFT Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Piedmont Region Number of observations 2 CAS Compound namel Wat Sed Tis Sol 2-96-60-8 Benzenediol, 4-ethyl-1,3- 1 0 0 0 541-02-6 Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl- 1 0 0 0 84-74-2 p Phthalic acid, di-(n-butyl) ester 1 0 0 0 117-81-7 vp Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethythexyl) ester (bis(2-ethylhexl)phthalate) 1 0 0 0 All Number compounds detected:3 4 0 0 0 4 Number compounds with Va. water quality standards detected:4 1 0 0 0 1 Number federal priority contaminants observed:4 2 0 0 0 2 Number EPA contaminants of concern observed:4 0 0 0 0 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. 3 Aroclors, DDT products, Chlordane isomers counted separately. 4 Aroclors, DDT products counted separately; Chlordane isomers grouped as one. Table 2 - continued. DRAFT Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region Number of observations2 CAS Compound name1 Wat Sed Tis Sol 98-86-2 Acetophenone (1-phenylethanone) 0 1 0 0 123-79-5 Adipic acid, dioctyl ester 0 1 0 0 309-00-2 vpc Aldrin 0 1 0 0 29812-79-1 Amine, 0-decylhydroxyl- 0 4 0 0 3091-35-8 Androstane-3,17-dione, bis-(O-methyloxime)- 0 0 2 0 120-12-7 vp Anthracene 0 4 0 0 613-12-7 Anthracene, 2-methyl- 0 1 0 0 81-64-1 Anthracenedione, 1,4-dihydroxy-9,10- 0 1 0 0 12674-11-2 vpc Aroclor 1016 (PCB-1016) 0 3 1 0 11104-28-2 vpc Aroclor 1221 (PCB-1221) 1 0 0 0 11097-69-1 vpc Aroclor 1254 (PCB-1254) 0 3 0 0 11096-82-5 vpc Aroclor 1260 (PCB-1260) 1 18 10 0 3691-12-1 Azulene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7-(l-methylethenyl)- 0 2 0 0 90-60-8 Benzaldehyde, 3,5-dichloro-2-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 90-02-8 Benzaldehyde, 2-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 123-08-0 Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy- 0 1 0 0 121-33-5 Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy- 0 3 0 0 3376-32-7 Benzaldehyde, o-methyloxime- 0 1 0 0 56-55-3 vp Benz[a]anthracene 0 16 0 0 57-97-6 Benz[a]anthracene, 7,12-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 2381-31-9 Benz[a]anthracene, 8-methyl- 0 0 1 0 612-64-6 Benzenamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso- 2 1 0 0 74672-05-2 Benzene, 1-(1,3-dimethyl-3-butenyl)-4-methoxy- 0 4 0 0 42524-30-1 Benzene, 3-methyl-4-pentenyl- 0 1 0 0 41182-85-8 Benzenecarboximidoyl bromide, N-methyl- 1 0 0 0 39563-50-3 Benzenediamine, N-(l-methytheptyl)-1,4- 0 1 0 0 319-84-6 pc Benzenehexachloride, alpha- (alpha-BHC; alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane) 1 0 0 0 58-89-9 vpc Benzenehexachloride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane; 1 0 1 0 6639-57-2 Benzenethiazolecarboxaldehyde, 2- 0 1 0 0 19195-17-6 Benzo[c]cinnocline, 2-ethoxy- 0 1 0 0 205-99-2 vp Benzo[b]fluoranthene (benz[e]acephenanthrylene) 0 22 0 0 205-82-3 Benzo[j]fluoranthene 0 7 0 0 207-08-9 vp Benzo[k]fluoranthene 0 8 0 0 191-24-2 p Benzo[ghi]perylene 0 4 0 0 50-32-8 vp Benzo[a]pyrene 0 10 0 0 192-97-2 Benzo[e]pyrene 0 1 0 0 40458-77-3 Bicyclo[3.2.1)oct-6-en-3-one, 8-oxa- 0 1 0 0 13049-35-9 Biphenyl, 2,2'diethyl- 0 1 0 0 105-60-2 Caprolactam 1 0 0 0 Carbon, total organic 0 41 0 0 5103-71-9 vpc Chlordane, alpha- (cis-chlordane) 0 7 4 0 5103-74-2 vpc Chlordane, gamma- (trans-chlordane) 0 7 0 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 - continued. Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region Number of observations2 CAS compound namel Wat Sed Tis Sol Chlorinated hydrocarbon 2 0 0 0 vpc Chlorobiphenyl, poly- 4 0 0 0 218-01-9 vp Chrysene 0 19 0 0 470-82-6 Cineole, 1,8- 0 1 0 0 53327-11-0 Cyanobenzoic acid, 4-, 3-methoxyphenyl ester 0 0 1 0 13828-37-0 Cyclohexanemethanol, cis-4-(l-methylethyl)- 0 0 1 0 13491-79-7 Cyclohexanol, 2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)- 0 4 0 0 540-97-6 Cyclohexasiloxane, dodecamethyl- 1 0 0 0 6376-92-7 Cyclopentanone, 2-(l-methylpropyl)- 1 0 0 0 17384-72-4 Cyclopent[a]indene, 3,8-dihydro-1,2,3,3,8,8-hexamethyl- 0 0 1 0 72-54-8 vpc DDD, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDD) 0 14 9 0 72-55-9 vpc DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDE) 0 18 16 0 50-29-3 vpc DDT, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDT) 0 15 4 0 25152-84-5 Deca-2,4-dienal, (E,E)- 0 0 8 0 62237-99-4 Decane, 2,2,7-trimethyl- 1 0 0 0 334-48-5 Decanoic acid 0 2 0 0 5746-58-7 Decanoic acid, 12-methyltetra- 0 1 0 0 21078-65-9 Decanol, 2-ethyl- 0 14 0 0 53-70-3 vp Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 0 1 0 0 60-57-1 vpc DieLdrin 0 2 1 0 Diketone, C1O-C15- 0 1 0 0 57633-63-3 DioxaboroLane, 2,4-dimethyL-1,3,2- 1 0 1 0 74793-11-6 Dioxolane, 2-cyclohexyL-4,5-dimethyL-1,3- 0 0 1 0 935-45-5 Dioxolane, 2-ethyl-2-isobutyl-1,3- 0 0 1 0 4362-18-9 Dioxolane, 2-methyl-2-(phenylmethyl)-1,3- 0 0 1 0 1120-16-7 Dodecanamide 0 1 0 0 3891-98-3 Dodecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl- 1 0 0 0 143-07-7 Dodecanoic acid 0 2 0 0 959-98-8 vp Endosulfan I (alpha-endosulfan) 0 1 0 0 10224-91-6 Ethane, 1,1-bis(p-ethylphenyl)- 0 2 0 0 93-56-1 Ethanediol, 1-phenyl-1,2- 0 0 1 0 551-93-9 Ethanone, 1-(2-aminophenyl)- 0 1 0 0 Extractable organic compound, UID 2 9 16 0 206-44-0 vp Fluoranthene 0 28 0 0 17108-52-0 Furan, 2,3-dihydro-2,5-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 2407-43-4 Furanone, 5-ethyl-2(5H)- 0 0 1 0 76-44-8 vpc Heptachlor 0 0 1 0 1024-57-3 pc Heptachlor epoxide 0 1 0 0 54105-67-8 Heptadecane, 2,6-dimethyl- 1 0 0 0 2922-51-2 Heptadecanone 0 1 0 0 59782-31-9 Heptadecylthiophene, 2- 0 1 0 0 41654-23-3 Heptenoic acid, 2-, 3-(l-methylethyl)-6-oxo-methyl ester 1 0 0 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant,c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or efftuent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 continued. Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region DRAFT Number of observations2 CAS Compound name1 Wat Sed Tis Sol 629-80-1 Hexadecanal 0 3 0 0 57-10-3 Hexadecanoic acid 1 0 0 0 38701-07-4 Hexadienoic acid, 2,3-, 2-methyl-4-phenylethyl ester 0 1 0 0 5932-91-2 Hexanal, 4,4-dimethyl- 0 3 0 0 103-23-1 Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl) ester 0 10 0 0 37052-13-4 Imidazol-2-amine, 1H-phenanthro[9,10-D] 0 2 4 0 696-23-1 Imidazole, 2-methyl-4-nitro-lH- 0 0 2 0 4912-92-9 Indene, 2,3-dihydro-1,1-dimethyl-1H- 0 1 0 0 193-39-5 vp Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 0 5 0 0 62108-16-1 Indole, 2,3-dihydro-4-methyl-lH- 0 2 0 0 1761-10-0 Indolizine, 3-methyl- 0 1 0 0 138-86-3 Limonene 0 21 24 0 Lipid content, percent 0 0 27 0 12427-38-2 Maneb 0 1 0 0 Moisture content, percent 0 41 27 0 91-20-3 p Naphthalene 0 1 0 0 473-13-2 Naphthalene, octahydro-1,4 dimethyl-2-(l-methyLethenyL)- 0 1 0 0 612-94-2 Naphthalene, 2-phenyL- 0 1 0 0 118-46-7 Naphthalenol, 8-amino-2- 0 0 1 0 22738-31-4 Naphthalenone, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-2(1H)- 0 1 0 0 6831-17-0 Naphthalen-2-one, octahydro-2H-cyctopropa-[a] 0 1 0 0 16587-34-1 Naphtho(2,3-d)thiophene, 4,9-dimethyl- 0 1 0 0 5910-87-2 Nonadienal, (E,E)-2,4- 0 0 2 0 1120-07-6 Nonanamide 2 2 1 0 646-13-9 Octadecanoic acid, 2-methytpropyl ester 2 0 0 0 56554-96-2 Octadecenal, 2- 1 0 0 0 301-02-0 Octadecenamide, (Z)-9- 1 4 0 0 16754-48-6 Orthoformic acid, tri-sec-butyl ester 0 0 2 0 15769-89-8 Oxzine, tetrahydro-2-methyl-6-phenyl-2H-l,2- 0 0 1 0 1002-84-2 Pentadecanoic acid 0 4 0 0 502-69-2 Pentadecanone, 6,10,14-trimethyl-2- 0 2 0 0 1119-29-5 Pentanamide, 4-methyl- 0 0 2 0 74685-46-4 Pentanol, 2-chloro-4-methyl-3- 0 11 0 0 292-46-6 Pentathiepane, 1,2,3,5,6- (Lenthionine) 0 1 0 0 85-01-8 p Phenanthrene 0 15 0 0 55125-03-6 Phenanthrene, 3,9-bis(1,1-dimethytethyl)- 0 3 0 0 55334-01-5 Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyl(tetradecahydro- 0 8 0 0 2531-84-2 Phenanthrene, 2-methyl- 0 3 0 0 832-64-4 Phenanthrene, 4-methyl- 0 1 0 0 24035-50-5 Phenanthrenecarboxyaldehyde, octahydro-1,4a-dimethy-l- 0 3 1 0 7715-44-8 Phenanthrenone, decahydro-1,1,4A,7,7-pentamethyl-2(lH)- 0 4 0 0 85-60-9 Phenol, 4,4'-butylidene bis[2-(1,1-dimethyl)-5-methyl- 4 5 0 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federal priority contaminant, c=federal contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sediment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. Table 2 - continued. Va. Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region Number of observations2 CAS Compound name1 Wat sed Tis Sol 26967-65-7 Phenol, diethyl- 0 1 0 0 5635-50-7 Phenol, 4,4'-(1,2-diethyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis- 0 9 0 0 108-39-4 Phenol, 3-methyl- (m-cresol) 0 1 0 0 106-44-5 Phenol, 4-methyl- (p-cresol) 0 2 0 0 88-24-4 Phenol, 2,2'-methylenebis[6-(1,1-dimethyl)-4-ethyl- 0 3 1 0 25154-52-3 Phenol, nonyl- 0 1 0 0 104-40-5 Phenol, 4-nonyl- 0 6 0 0 140-66-9 Phenol, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- 0 8 0 0 54932-78-4 Phenol, 4-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- 0 8 0 0 117-82-8 Phthalic acid, bis(2-methoxyethyl) ester 0 9 0 0 17851-53-5 Phthalic acid, butyl isobutyl ester 0 2 1 0 84-66-2 p Phthalic acid, diethyl ester 0 0 1 0 117-81-7 vp Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethylhexy)ester(bis(2-ethylhexl)phthalate) 1 0 0 0 603-11-2 Phthalic acid, 3-nitro- 0 6 0 0 150-86-7 Phytol 0 2 0 0 675-20-7 Piperidin-2-one 0 0 2 0 74367-33-2 Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 0 8 0 0 55759-91-6 Propenal, 3-(2,2,6-trimethyl-7-oxabicyclo[4,1,0]hept-1-yl)-2- 2 0 0 0 23230-88-8 Propene, 3-t-butoxy-2-(isopropoxymethyl)- 0 1 0 0 129-00-0 vp Pyrene 0 27 0 0 872-50-4 Pyrrolidin-2-one, N-methyl- 1 0 0 0 13435-09-1 Silanediamine, 1,1-dimethyl-n-n'-diphenyl- 2 0 0 0 Sulfur, acid volatile 0 41 0 0 19812-64-7 Tetradecane-1,14-diol 0 2 0 0 544-63-8 Tetradecanoic acid 0 1 0 0 292-45-5 Tetrathiepane, 1,2,4,6- 0 1 0 0 638-53-9 Tridecanoic acid 0 1 0 0 6006-01-5 Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- 0 19 24 0 289-16-7 Trithiolane, 1,2,4- 0 1 0 0 180-43-8 Undecane, spiro[5,5]- 1 0 0 0 74630-38-9 Undecene, 5-methyl-1- 2 0 0 0 ALL Number compounds detected:3 29 113 39 0 161 Number compounds with Va. water quality standards detected:4 4 20 9 0 24 Number federal priority contaminants observed:4 5 24 10 0 30 Number EPA contaminants of concern observed:4 4 10 9 0 0 1 V=Va. water quality standard, p=federaL priority contaminant, c=federaL contaminant of concern. 2 Wat=ambient water or effluent, Sed=sedIment, Tis=tissue, Sol=soil. 3 Aroclors, DDT products, Chlordane isomers counted separately. 4 Aroclors, DDT products counted separately; Chlordane isomers grouped as one. DRAFT Table 3. Compounds detected in water (w, ambient or effluent), sediment (s), tissue (t), and soil (l) samples collected under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratabte compounds in the Coastal Zone Management area of Virginia. Detections are reported by facility group; Table 1 lists sampling stations within each group, and site maps are in Appendix A. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region DAHLGREN NAVAL WEAPONS LAB DA-G1 Gambo Creek bel IRP Sites 2,9,12,19 and Hideaway Pond W Aliphatic hydrocarbon, CIO-C15 DA-G2 STP outfall 001 to Potomac R t Adipic acid, (2-ethyhexyl) ester w Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C1O-C15 w Aliphatic hydrocarbon, C15-C20 s Anthracene s Anthracene, 1,4-dihydro-1,4-etheno- s Anthracene, 2-methyl- s t Aroclor 1016 (PCB-1016) s t Aroclor 1254 (PCB-1254) s t Aroclor 1260 (PCB-1260) s Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy- s Benz[a]lanthracene s Benzene, 1-ethoxyethyl- w Benzenehexachloride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane; Lindane) s Benzo[b]fluoranthene (benz[e]acephenanthrylene) s Benzo[j]fluoranthene s Benzo[k]fluoranthene s Benzo[a]fluorene s Benzo[b]fluorene s Benzo[ghi]perylene s Benzo[a]pyrene s Benzothiazol-2-one, 3H- s Biphenyl, 2,2'-diethyl- s t chlordane, alpha- (cis-chlordane) s t Chlordane, gamma- (trans-chlordane) s Chrysene s chrysene, 3-methyl- t Cyclohexene, 3-methyl-6-(1-methylethyl)- s Cyclopenta[def]phenanthrene, 4H- s t DDD, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDD) s t DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDE) s DDT, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDT) t Deca-2,4-denial, (E,E)- s Dibenz(a,h)anthracene s t Dielrin t w Endrin t Ethanol, 2-phenyl- Table 1 -- continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Enviromental Quality's Northern Region -- continued DAHLGREN NAVAL WEAPONS LAB -- continued DA-G2 STP outfall 001 to Potomac R -- continued s t Extractable organic compound, UID s Fluoranthene s Fluorene w Heptachlor w Heptachlor epoxide t Hepta-2,4-dienal, (E,E)- t Hexahydro-1H-azepine t Imidazole, 2-methyl-4-nitro-1H- s Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene s Indole, 2-methyl-3-phenyl-1H- t Isolan s t Limonene w Methoxychlor s Naphthalene s Naphthalene, 2-phenyl- t Octadecenoic acid, [R-(Z)]-12-(acetyloxy)-9-, methyl ester w Pentane, 2,4-dibromo- s Phenanthrene s Phenanthrene, 3-methyl- s Phenol, 4-methyl- (p-cresol) s Phenol, 2,2'-methylenebis[6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-ethyl- s Phenol, nonyl- s Phenol, 4-nonyl- s Phenol, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- s Phenol, 4-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- s Phthalic acid, bis(2-methoxyethyl) ester s Phthalic acid, butyl isobutyl ester w Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethythexyl) ester (bis(2-ethylhexl)phthlate) s t Phthalic acid, 3-nitro- s Phytol s Propylate, chloro- (ACN) s Pyrene s Pyrene, 1-methyl- s t Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- TabLe I continued. 'DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmentat Quatfty's Northern Region continued QUANTICO MARINE BASE QM-Gl Outfatt 060 and internat sampting point 360 r-T-T-T-1 I I IWI JALcohot, C7 I I IWI JALiphatic hydrocarbon, C9 I I lwl JALqiphatic hydrocarbon, C10 I I lwl lBenzene, I-ethenyL-2-methyL I I lwl lBenzene, (1-methyL-1-propenyt)- I I lwl l8enzene, 1,2,3,5-tetramethyt- I I lwl l8enzene, 1,2,4-trimethyL- I I lwl lBenzene, 1,3,5-trimethyL- I I JwJ ]Ester, C8 I I lwl lHexane, 2,4,4-trimethyl- DRAFT Table I conti nued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region continued WOODBRIDGE RESEARCH FACILITY (HARRY DIAMOND LAOS) WRF-G1 Old landfill, IRP Site 1 to Occoquan Bay r-T-r-m I I I I itlAcenaphthene I I I ILIAcenaphthylene I Itl I lAcetamde, N-(2-phenyLethyl)- IsItl I jAdipic acid, (2-ethyLhexyt) ester I I I ItlAnthracene I I I ItlAnthracenedione, 9,10- (Anthraquinone) Isl I I jAroclor 1254 (PCB-1254) jsjtjwjljAroclor 1260 QCB-1260) I I jwj jAromatic hydrocarbon Isl I I jAzutene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyt-7-(l-methylethenyt)- Isl I I lBenzatdehyde, 4-hydroxy- Isl I Itlienz[alanthracene Isl I I lBenzialanthracene, 7,12-dimethyL- Isql I I ISenz(alanthracene, 2-methyL- I I I lilBenz[delanthracen-7-one, 7H- I Itl I 18enzenamine, 4-(4-morphotinyt)- Isl I I 18enzene, 1-(1,3-dimethyL-3-butenyt)-4-methoxy- I Itl I 1enzene, 3-ethenyt-5,5-dimethythexyl- Isl I I Isenzenehexachtoride, beta- (beta-BHC; beta-hexachtorocctohexane) I I I lilBenzenehexachtoride, delta- (detta-BHC; detta-hexachtorocyctohexane) I Itl I lBenzimidazote, 1,2-diphenyt-IH- I I I ItlBenzoate, 2-phenoxyethanot- Isl I ItIBenzo[blftuoranthene (enz[elacephenanthryLene) Isl I ItIBenzo[ilfluoranthene Isl I ItIBerkzo[klftuoranthene Isl I lilBenzo[al.fqluorene I Itl I lBenzofurandione, 4-(p-hydroxybenzyt)-6-methoxy-2,3- I I I ItIBenzoic acid Isl I ItIBenzo(hi3peryterie I I I itiBenzoEc3phenanthrene IsItl ItIBenzo[a3pyrene I I I illBenzo(elpyrem Isl I I lBenzo(bitriphenytene I I I ItIButane, 2,3-dichtoro-2-methyt- I Itl I lBut-3-en-2-one, 4-phenyl- jsjtj I IChlordane, alpha- (cis-chlordane) jsjtj j(jChLordane,ganma- (trans-chLordane) I I Jwj IChtorobiphenyL, poty- Isl I ItIChrysene Isl I ItIChrysene, 3-methyL- I Itl I Icyanobenzoic acid, 4-, 4-methoxyphenyt ester I I ltlcycLohexanot, 2-(11-dimethyLethyl)- I Itl I ICyctohexene, 1-methyl-5-(I-methylethenyt)- Isl I I(IyctopentaEdeflphenanthrene, 4H- jsjtj ItIDDD, 4,41- (p,pq'-DqDD) IsItl ILIDDE, 4,41- (p,pl-DDE) jsjtj ILIDDT, 4,41- (p,pl-DDT) DRAFT TabLe 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of EnvironmentaL QuaLity's Northern Region continued WOODBRIDGE RESEARCH FACILITY (HARRY DIAMOND LABS) continued WRF-Gl Old landfill, IRP Site I to Occoquan Say continued I Itl I iDeca-2,4-dienaL, (E,E)- Isl I I IDecanoic acid I I I ILIDecyLoxirane, tetra- sl I ILIDibenz(a,h)anthracene IsItl I IDieLdrin I Itl I IDodecanamide Isl I I lEndosulfan I (aipha-endosuLfan) Isl I I jEndosuLfan 11 (beta-endosuLfan) Isl I ILIEndosutfan suLfate IsItl I lEndrin IsItl I lEndrin aidehyde I Itl I lEthanethioic acid, S-U-methyLethyL) ester I I I ILIEthanot, 2-(2-butoxyethoxy)-, acetate I Itl I lExtractabte organic coffpound, UID Isl I ILIFLuoranthene I I I ILIFLuorene Isl I I lHeptachLor epoxide I Itl I lHepta-2,4-clienaL, (E,E)- I Itl I IHeptanethioic acid, S-methyt ester Isl I ILIHexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethythexyl) ester IsItl I limidazoL-2-amine, IH-phenanthro[9,10-D] I Itl I limidazole, 1-methyL-5-nitro-IH- I It[ I IlmqidazoqLe, 2-methyL-4-nitro-Ifl- I Itl I IlmidazoLinedione, 1-methyL-2,4- Isl I ILI]ndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene IsItl IllLimonene I I I ItINaphtha(ene I Itl I INaphthaLenoL, 8-amino-2- I Itl I INitrosobenzene IsItl I INonanamide I I I ILINonanoic acid, 7-methyt-, methyL ester I I I ILIOctadecenaL, 12- Isl I ILloctadecenamide, M-9- I Itl I loctadecenoic acid, lR-(Z)3-12-(acetytoxy)-9-, methyL ester I Itl I lorthoformic acid, tri-sec-butyL ester I Itl I IPentanamide I Itl I IPentanamide, 4-methyL- I I I 0qILIPentanoL, 2-chLoro-4-methyL-3- Isl I ILIPhenanthrene I I I 1llPhenanthrene, 2-methyL- I I I ItlPhenanthrene, 3-methyL- I I ILIPhenanthrene, 9-methyt- Isl I I IPhenoL, 4,4--(1,2-diethyl-1,2-ethanediyL)bis- I Itl I IPhenoL, 4-methyL-2,6-di-(t-butyL)- Is[ I ILIPhenoL, 4-nonyl- Isl I IllPhenot, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyt)- Isl I ItIPhenoL, 4-(2,2,3,3-tetramethyLbutyL)- Tabte I continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmentat Quality's Northern Region --.Continued WOODBRIDGE RESEARCH FACILITY (HARRY DIAMOND LABS) -- continued WRF-Gl Otd landfill, IRP Site 1 to Occoquan Bay -- continued I Itl I lPhenytpropanedioic acid I Itl I lPhthatic acid, bis(2-methoxyethyt) ester I I I IllPhthatic acid, butyt isobutyt ester I I Iwl IPhthaLic acid, diethyt ester I Itl I lPhthaLic acid, 3-nitro- Isl I I lPhytol I Itl I lPropanamine, N-methyt-N-nitro-2- Isl I ItlPropanoic acid, 2-methyt-, 2,2-dimethyt-l-(2-hydroxy-l-methylethyt)propyt ester I I I ItlPropene, 3-t-butoxy-2-(isopropoxymethyl)- I Itl I IPropionic acid, 3-phenyl- Isl I ItlPyrene Isl I I IPyrene, 1,3-dimethyL- I I I ILIPyrene, 1-methyL- Is] I IllPyrene, 2-methyL- I I I Itli-PyrenecarboxaLdehyde Isl I I lPyrroLidinedione, 3-ethytidene-4-methyt-2,5- I Itl I IToluamide, atpha-(l-hydroxycyctohexyL)-o- I Itl I ITricycto[2.2.01,4]heptan-2-one, 6-nitro- IsItl lilTridecatrienenitrite, 4,8,12-trimethyt-3,7,11- I Itl I 17ridecatrienoic acid, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11-, methy L ester Isl I I ITriphenytene I Itl I lVitamin E acetate (VAN) WRF-G2 Main compound to storm drainages to Potomac River Isl I I lAnthracene, 9-bUtyttetradecahydro- Isl I I lAnthracene, 9-cycLohexyttetradecahydro- Isl I I lAnthracene, 9-dodecyttetradecahydro- Isl Iwl lAroctor 1260 (PCB-1260) I I lwl lAromatic hydrocarbon Isl I I Isenz[alanthracene I I Iwl Isenzene, 1,3,5-trimethyt- Isl I I Isenzo[biftuoranthene (benztelacephenanthryLene) Isl I I -IBenzoEklftuoranthene Isl I I 18enzopyran-4-one, 3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyt)-6,7-dimethoxy-4H-l- Isl I I leenzoEalpyrene I I Iwl IChLorobiphenyL, poly- Isl I I lCholestane, (5-alpha, 14-beta) Isl I I IChrysene I I Iwl lCumene ((1-methytethyt)-benzene) Isl I I lCycLohexane, 1-11-(oxydi-2,1-ethanediyL)bis(4-methyL- Isl I I IDecanoic acid Isl I I fDodecytamine, N,N-di-(2-hydroxyethyL)- Isl I I IFtuoranthene Isl I I IGona-1,3,5,7,9-pentaen-17-one, 13-ethyt-3-hydroxy- Table 1 continued. DRAFT I Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region -- continued WOODBRIDGE RESEARCH FACILITY (HARRY DIAMOND LABS) -- continued WRF-G2 Main compound to storm drainages to Potomac River -- continued s Hexanedioic acid, bis (2-ethylhexyl) ester s Limonene s Naphthalenol, 8-amino-2- s Nonanamide s Octadecenamide, (Z)-9- s Penten-3-one, 4-methyl-1-phenyl-1- s Phenanthrene s Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyltetradecahydro- s Phenanthrenecarboxyaldehyde, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-1- (dehydroabietaidehyde) s Phytol s Pyrene s Stigmastane s Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3-7-11- s Undecanoic acid w Xylene, o- (1,2-dimethylbenzene, 1,2-dimethyl Table 1 -- continuted Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Piedmont Region CHESAPEAKE CORP. CC-G1 Outfall 001 to Pamunkey River w Benzenediol, 4-ethyl-1,3- w Cyclopentasiloxane, decamethyl- w Phthalic acid, di-(n-butyl) ester w phthalic acid, di-(2-ethylhexyl) ester (bis(2-ethylhexl)phthalate) Table I -- continued. P47% Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region ALLIED COLLOIDS ACL-G1 Outfall 001 to X-trib to Nansemond River s Aldrin s t Aroclor 1260 (PCB-1260) s Benzene, 1-(1,3-dimethyl-3-butenyl)-4-methoxy- s Benzenediamine, N-(1-methylheptyl)-1,4- s Benzo[b] fluoranthene (benz [e] acephenanthrylene) s w Caprolactam s Chlordane, alpha- (cis-chlordane) s Chlordane, gamma- (trans-chlordane) s Cineole, 1,8- t Cyclohexanemethanol, cis-4-1(1-methylethyl)- s t DDD, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDD) s t DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDE) s t DDT, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDT) t Deca-2,4-dienal, (E,E)- w Decane, 2,2,7-trimethyl- s Dieldrin t Dioxolane, 2-methyl-2-(phenylmethyl)-1,3- w Dodecane, 2,6,10-trimethyl- s Endosulfan I (alpha-endosulfan) t Extractable organic compound, UID s Fluoranthene s Heptachlor epoxide w Heptadecane, 2,6-dimethyl- s Heptadecylthiophene, 2- w Heptenoic acid, 2-, 3-(1-methylethyl)-6-oxo-methyl ester s Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethylhexyl)ester s Imidazol-2-amine, 1H-phenanthro[9,10-D] s Limonene s Octadecenamide, (Z)-9- t Orthoformic acid, tri-sec-butyl ester t Pentanamide, 4-methyl- s Phenanthrene, 3,9-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl)- s Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyltetradecahydro- s Phenol, 4,4'-(1,2-diethyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis- s Phenol, 4-nonyl- s Phenol, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- s Phenol, 4-(2,2,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)- s Pyrene t Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,711- Table 1 -- continued. )RAPP Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater --Region -- continued BOYKINS NARROW FABRICS CORP. BNF-Gl Outfall 001 to X-trib to Tarrara Creek s Anthracenedione, 1,4-dihydroxy-9,10- s Aroclor 1016 (PCB-1016) s Aroclor 1260 (PCB-1260) s w Benzenamine, N-ethyl-N-nitroso- w Benzenecarboximidoyl bromide, N-methyl- s Benzenethiazolecarboxaldehyde, 2- s Benzo [c]cinnoline, 2-ethoxy- s Benzo [b]fluoranthene (benz [e] acephenanthrylene) s Chrysene t DDD, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDD) s t DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDE) t DDT, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDT) t Deca-2,4-dienal, (E,E)- s Dieldrin w Dioxaborolane, 2,4-dimethyl-1,3,2- s t w Extractable organic compound, UID s Fluoranthene w Hexadecanoic acid t Imidazol-2amine, 1H-phenanthro[9,10-D] t Imidazole, 2-methyl-4-nitro-1H- t Limonene t Naphthalenol, 8-amino-2- s Naphthalen-2-one, octahydro-2H-cyclopropa[a]- t Nonadienal, (E,E)-2,4- t w Nonanamide w Octadecenoic acid, 2-methylpropyl ester w Octadecenal, 2- w Octadecenamide, (Z)-9- t Oxzine, tetrahydro-2-methyl-6-pherryl-2H-1,2- s Phenanthrenecarboxyaldehyde, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-1- (dehydroabietaldehyde) s w Phenol, 4,4'-butylidene bis [2-(1,1-dimethyl)-5-methyl- s Phenol, diethyl- s Phenol, 4,4'-(1,2-diethyl-1,2-ethanediyl)bis- s Phenol, 2,2'-methylenebis[6-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-ethyl- s Phthalic acid, bis(2-methoxyethyl) ester s Phthalic acid, 3-nitro- w Propenal, 3-(2,2,6-trimethyl-7-oxabicyclo[4,1,0]hept-1yl)-2- s Pyrene w Pyrrolidin-2-one, N-methyl- w Silanediamine, 1,1-dimethyl-n-n'-diphenyl- s t Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- w Undecene, 5-methyl-1- Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued BOYKINS NARROW FABRICS CORP. continued BNF-G2 Tarrara Cr 40 yds ab confl BNFO01 X-trib s DDD, 4,4- (p,p'-DDD) s Extractable organic compound, UID s Limonene s Phenol, 3-methyl- (m-cresol). Table 1 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued DRIVER NAVAL RADIO TRANSMITTING FACILITY DRI-G1 PCB site on X-trib to Star Creek s Anthracene, 2-methyL- s t Aroctor 1016 (PCB-1016) s Aroclor 1254 (PCO-1254) s t w Aroctor 1260 (PCB-1260) s Benzaidehyde, 3,5-dichtoro-2-hydroxy- s Benzadehyde, 2-hydroxy- s Benzaaldehyde, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy- s Benzaldehyde, o-methyloxime- s Benz[a]anthracene s Benzao[b] fluoranthene (benz[e]acephenanthry(ene) s Benzo[j]fluoranthene s Benzo[k]fluoranthene s Benzo[ghi]perylene s Benzo[a]pyrene s Biphenyl, 2,2'-diethyt- s w chlorobipheny, poly- s chrysene s t DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDE) t Dioxaborolane, 2,4-dqimethyl-1,3,2- s Ethane, 1,1-bis(p-ethylphenyl)- t Ethanediol, I-phenyl-1,2- jsqjtj I lExtractabte organic compound, UID Isl I I IFLuoranthene I Itl I IFuranone, 5-ethyqt-2q(5Hq)- Isl I I j1ndeno(1,2,3.cdq)pyrene Isl I I lindote,.,2,3-dihydro-4-methyqt-lH- jsjtqj I ILimonene Isl I I lPentathiepane, 1,2,3,5,6- (Lenthionine) Isl I I lPhenanthrene Isl I I lPhenanthrene, 3,9-bis(1,1-dimethyqtethyqt)- Isql I I lPhenanthrene, 9-dodecyqttetradecahydro- Isql I I lPhenanthrene, 2-methyt- Isl I I Phenot, 4,41-buty(idene bis[2-(1,1-dimethyql)-5-methyqt- Isql I I jPhenot, 4,41(1,2-diethyt-1,2-)bis- Isql I I Phenot, 4-methyL- q(p-cresol) jsjtj IqjPhenot, 2,21-methytenebis[6-q(1,1-dimethytethyLq)-4-ethyql- Isql I I Phenot, nonyt- qIsl I I Phenot, 4-nonyL- Isql I I Phenot, 4-8(1,1,3,3-tetramethytqbuty4qL8q)- Is4ql I I 0qI04qf04qtenot, 4-8q(2,2,3,3-tetramethy4qlbuty4qL8q)- Is6ql I I 0qjPhthatic acid, bis4q(2-methoxyethy4qt) ester 0qIs0ql I I 0qlPhtha4qtqic acid, buty4ql qisobuty4qt ester 6qIsl I I 6qjPyrene 4qIsl I I IT2qirath2qiepane, 1,2,4,6- jsjj I 8qITridecatrienen4qitrqite, 4,812-trimethy4ql-3,7,11- Isl I I ITr4qithqiolane, 1,2,4- Table 1 continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region -- continued HAMPTON ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT - NANSEMOND STP HN-G1 Outfall 001 to Nansemond River s Anthracene s t Aroctor 1260 (PCB-1260) s Azutene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7-(l-methytethenyl)- s Benz(a] anthracene s Benz[alanthracene, 7,12-dimethyqt- t enz(alanthracene, 8-methyt- s Benzene, 1-(1,3-diffithyL-3-bttenyt)-4-methoxy- w Benzenehexachtoride, alpha- (aqtpha-BHC; alpha-hexachtorocyclohexane) wBenzenehexachtoride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gaffm-hexachtorocycLohexane; Lindane) s Benzo[bituoranthene (benzte]acephenanthrytene) s Benzoltuoranthene s Benzo[ktuoranthene s enzo[ghiperyLene sBenzotalpyrene sBenzo[elpyrene sBicyc(o[3.2.1q3oct-6-en-3-one, 8-oxa- I Itl I IChtordane, alpha- (cqis-chqLordaneq) I I jwqj IChqLorinated hydrocarbon s Chrysene t I qJDDD, 4,41- (p,p'-DDD) I Itl I qIDDE, 4,41- (p,p'DDE) I Itql I joeca-2,4-dqienaqL, (E,Eq)- I Itql I qIDqieldrqin I Itql I IDqioxoqtane, 2-cycqtohexyqt-4,5-dqimethyqt-1,3- qIsql I I qIDodecanamqide I Itl I lExtractobqte organic compound, UID Isql I I IFqLuoranthene Isl I I IHexanedoic acid, bis(2-ethythexyqt) ester s I Ilmqidazoqt-2-amine, 1H-phenantqhroE9,10-D3 I Itql I q11midazoqte, 2-metqhyqt-4-nitro-qIH- Isl I I lqindenoq(1,2,3-cq)pyrene IsqItl I ILimonene Isql I I 114aneqb Isl I I INaphthatene, 2-phenyt- Isl I I INaphthatenone, octahydro-1,4a-dim6thyql-2(1H)- Isl I I INaphtho(2,3-dq)thiophene, 4,9-dimethyt- Isl I INonanamide 0Isl I I loctadecenamide, (Z8)-9- I 0qItl I lorthoformic acid, tri-sec-buty4ql ester qIs6ql I I Phenanthrene qIsl I I 0qlPhenanthrene, 9-dodecyttetradecahydro- 6qIsl I I 0qlPhenanthrene, 2-methyt- Is0ql I I 0qlPhenot, 4q,4q1q-8q(1q,2-diethyt-1,2-ethaned4qiyt4q)bis- Isl I I 0qjPhenot, 4-nonyt- 0qIsl I I 0qjPhenot, 4q-8q(q,1q,3,3-tetramethy4qlbutyL8q)- 6qIs2ql I I Phenot, 4-4q(2,2,3,3-tetramethy0qlbutyL4q)- 4qIs4ql I I 0qlPhtha8qt8qic acid, b8qis8q(2-methoxyethyqt) ester TabLe 1 continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region -- continued HAMPTON ROADS SANITATION DISTRICT - NANSEMOND STP continued HN-Gl Outfall 001 to Nansemond River -- continued s t Phthalic acid, butyl isobutyl ester s Pyrene s t Tridecatrienenitrile, 4,8,12-trimethyt-3,7,11- Tabte I continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Envirornmental QuaLity's Tidewater Region continued NASA GODDARD FLIGHT CENTER NASA-Gl NASA Goddard Flight Center 001 W Chlorinated hydrocarbon Table I continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued NEW CHURCH ENERGY ASSOCIATES NCE-G1 Outfall 001 to X-trib to Pitt's Creek Adipic acid, dioctyl ester Androstane-3,17-dione, bis-(O-methyloxime)- Anthracene Aroctor 1221 (PCB-1221) Aroctlor 1260 (PCB-1260) Azultene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-7-(1-methylethenyL)- Benzene, 3-methyl-4-pentenyl- Benzenehexachloride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gamma-hexachlorocyclohexane; Lindane) Chlordane, alpha- (cis-chlordane) Chrysene Cyclohexasiloxane, dodecamethylt- Cyclopentanone, 2-(l-methylpropyL)- DDD, 4,4'- (p,p'l-DDD) DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'l-DDE) DDT, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDT) Decanoic acid Decanol, 2-ethyl- Diketone, CIO-C15- Dioxotane, 2-ethyl-2-isobutyl-1,3- Dodecanoic acid Fluoranthene Heptachlor Hexadecanal Hexanedioic acid, bis(2-ethythexyl) ester Imidazol-2-amine, 1H-phenanthro[9,10-D] Limonene Naphthalene Naphthalene, octahydro-1,4-dimethyl-2-(1-methylethenyl)- Pentadecanoic acid Pentanamide, 4-methyl- Pentanol, 2-chloro-4-methyl-3- Phenanthrene Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyltetradecahydro- Phytol Piperidin-2-one Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2,2-dimethyl-1-(2-hydroxy-l-methylethyl)propyl ester Pyrene Tetradecanoic acid Tridecanoic acid Tridecatrienenitrite, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- Undecane, spiro[5,5]- Table I continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmental, Quality's Tidewater Region continued YORKTOWN NAVAL WEAPONS STATION NWS-G1 East and west X-tribs to Roosevelt Pond Acetophenone (1-phenylethanone) Amine, 0-decythydroxyl- Anthracene Aroclor 1260 (PCB-1260) Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy- Benzaldehyde, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy- Benz [a] anthracene Benzo [b] fluoranthene (benz [e] acephenanthrylene) Benzo [j] fluoranthene Benzo (k) fluoranthene Benzo [ghi] perylene Benzo [a] pyrene Chlordane, alpha- (cis-chlordane) Chlordane, gamma- (trans-chlordane) Chrysene Cyanobenzoic acid, 4-, 3-methoxyphenyl ester Cyclohexanol, 2-(1,1-dimethylethyl)- Cyclopent [a] indene, 3,8-dihydro-1,2,3,3,8,8-hexamethyl- DDD, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDD) DDE, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDE) DDT, 4,4'- (p,p'-DDT) Deca-2,4-dienaL, (E,E)- Decanoic acid Decanoic acid, 12-methyltetra- Decanol, 2-ethyl- Dibenz (a,h)anthracene Dodecanoic acid Ethane, 1,1-bis(p-ethylphenyl)- Ethanone, 1-(2-aminophenyl)- Extractable organic compound, UID Fluoranthene Furan, 2,3-dihydro-2,5-dimethyl- Heptadecanone Hexadecanal Hexadienoic acid, 2,3-, 2-methyl-4-phenylethyl ester Hexanal, 4,4-dimethyl- Imidazol-2-amine, 1H-phenanthro[9,10-D] Indene, 2,3-dihydro-1,1-dimethyl-1H- Indeno (1,2,3-cd)pyrene Indolizine, 3-methyl- Limonene Pentadecanoic acid Pentadecanone, 6,10,14-trimethyl-2- Pentanol, 2-chloro-4-methyl-3- Phenanthrene Phenanthrene, 9-dodecyltetradecahydro- Phenanthrene, 4-methyl- Table 1 continued. DRAFT Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued YORKTOWN NAVAL WEAPONS STATION -- continued NWS-G1 East and west X-tribs to Roosevelt Pond -- continued Phenanthrenecarboxyaldehyde, octahydro-1,4a-dimethyl-1- (dehydroabietaldehyde) Phenanthrenone, decahydro-1,1,4A,7,7-pentamethyl-2(1H)- Phthalic acid, diethyl ester Phthalic acid, 3-nitro- Phytol Propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, 2,2-dimethyl-1-(2-hydroxy-l-methylethyl)propyl ester Propene, 3-t-buioxy-2-(isopropoxymethyl)- Pyrene Tetradecane-1,14-diol Tridecatrienenitrite, 4,8,12-trimethyl-3,7,11- NWS-G7 Seep at end of Barracks Rd Phthalic acid, di-(2-ethylhexyl) ester (bis(2-ethylhexl)phthalate) Table 4. Maximum concentrations in each facility groupi compared with standards and criteria for compounds detected in water (effluent or ambient), sediment, soft, and tissue samples collected under the 1993 Virginia Department of Environmental Quality's study of bioconcentratable compounds in the Coastal Zone Management area of Virginia. Asterisk (*) beneath criteria2 indicates exceedance. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soft, ug./kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Acensphthene iFacft.i Max. i Site max. max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .15000E+31 .65000E+31 cone. I .65340E+61 I .81000E+51 cone. I I .27000E+41 I I cone. 1.61000E+8 I jWRF-G1j I .45538E+31 I I I I I .14000E+31 I J Acenaphthylene lFacit.1 Max. Site I I Max. I max. max. I I Igroup I cone. I FStC I I cone. I I I cone. I I .310OOE-11 I I cone. I 1WRF-GII I I I .18000E+21 Anthracene IFacit.1 Max. I Site max. I I max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .85000E+21 .96000E+31 cone. I .33000E+71 I .41000E+61 cone. I .11000E+61 .11000E+61 I cone. 1.31000E+9 I AD I I I IDA-G2 I .76000E+21 I I I I IWRF-GII I .18000E+31 I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Senz[alanthracene ,Facit.i Max. Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .2300O.E+31 .16000E+41 cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+11 cone. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I I cone. 1.39000E+4 I IDA-G2 I .48000E+21 I I I I I I 1WRF-G11 .17000E+.31 I I I I .66000E+31 I I I I I I I I I I IWRF-G21 .12000E+31 I I I I I I I I I I I I BenzenehexachLoride, beta- (beta-SHC; beta-hexachLorocyclohexane) iFaciLA Max. i Site i Max. i Max. i Max. i Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .59800E+11 I .18000E+11 cone. I I .460OOE-11 I cone. 1.16000E+4 I 1WRF-G11 .55000E+01 I Benzenehexachloride, delta- (deLta-BHC; delta-hexachLorocyclohexane) iFaciLA Max. i Site max. i i A Max. i max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I I I cone. I I I cone. I I 1WRF-G11 I I I I I .15900E+11 I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region continued sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT BenzenehexachLoride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gem=-hexachlorocyctohexane; Lindane) Facitl Max. i Site i Max. i Max. i Max. i Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .32500E+41 I .24000E+11 cone. I.25000E+21 .630OOE-11 .100OOE-11 cone. 1.22000E+4 I IDA-G2 I I I I I I I I .12000E+01 I I I L- JP Benzo(blftuoranthene (benzEe3acephenanthryiene) iFaci(A Max. Site I Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I' I I cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+11 cone. I.31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I I cone. 1.39000E+4 I IDA-G2 I .59000E+21 I I I I I 1WRF-GII .40000E+31 I I I I I I .11000E+41 I I I I I I I I I I JWRF-G21 .38000E+31 I I I I Benzo[k3ftuoranthene iFaciLA Max. i Site i Max. i Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+21 cone. I.31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I cone. 1.39000E+5 I IDA-G2 I .73000E+21 I I I 1WRF-G11 .12000E+31 I .30000E+31 JWRF-G21 .55000E+2 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental. Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kq (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Benzota3pyrene iFecit.1 max. i Site Max. Max. max. Igroup I cone. I FSS,C I .4o6oOE+31 .25000E+41 cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+01 cone. I .31100E+01 .311OOE-11 I cone. 1.39000E+3 I IDA-G2 I.38000E+21 I I I IWRF-Gll .25000E+31 I I I .14000E+31 I I .53000E+31 I I I I I I I I I I I I IWRF-G21 .19000E+31 I I I I I Chtordane, total IFaciLj Max. Site I max. I Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .50000E+01 .60000E+11 cone. I .83190E+21 .30000E+31 .24000E+11 cone. I .590OOE-21 .590OOE-31 .400OOE-21 .400OOE-21 cone. 1.22000E+4 I IDA-G2 I.71200E+11 I I I .38900E+11 I I I 1WRF-GII .23100E+I,l I .24480E+21 I .31900E+11 TabLe 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of EnvironmentaL QuaLity's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or efftuent), ug/L (ppb) Soit, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Chrysene iFaciL.i Max. i Site Max. i Max. max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I I conc. I .93300E+ll I .43000E+31 conc. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I conc. 1.39000E+6 I IDA-G2 I .45000E+21 I I I I I I I IWRF-dll .18000E+31 I I I I .60000E+31 I I I I I IWRF-G21 .14000E+31 I I I I I . I --I I L Cumene ((I-methylethyL)-benzene) kacitj Max. i Site i i max. i max. i Max. loroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I I I .54000E+51 conc. I I I conc. 1.41000E+8 I IWRF-G21 I I I I .10000E+ll I I I DDD, totat IFacit.1 Max. Site Max. max. max. I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .20000E+ll .20000E+21 conc. I conc. I conc. I IDA-G2 I .32000E+31 IWRF-Gil .18000E+ll I I I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of EnvironmentaL Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERN VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT DDE, total iFaciL.i Max. i Site i Max. Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .20000E+11 .15000E+21 conc. I I I conc. I conc. IDA-G2 I .12000E+31 I I I I I I I I I I I 1WRF-GII .89000E+01 I I DDT, totaL iFecit.i Max. I Site Max. max. max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .10000E+11 .70000E+11 conc. I conc. I I I conc. I IDA-G2 I .31000E+21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1WRF-GII .69000E+01 I F DDD/DDE/DDT, calculated total iFaciL.i Max. i Site max. I Max. Max. I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I I conc. I .31624E+31 .50000E+41 .93000E+11 conc. I .590OOE-21 .590OOE-31 .100OOE-21 .10000E-21 conc. 1.84000E+4 IDA-G2 I I I .26470E+21 1WRF-G11 I I I .12660E+31 I I I .16600E+21 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) soft, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Dfbenz(a,h)anthracene iFacit.i Max. Site Max. max. max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .60000E+21 .26000E+31 cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+01 cone. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I I cone. 1.39000E+3 I IDA-G2 I .39000E+21 I I I I I I I I - I 1WRF-G11 .41000E+21 I I I .16000E+31 Dfetdrin iFaciL.1 max. i Site i Max. i max. i max. 'I Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .200OOE-11 .80000E+11 cone. I .65380E+11 I .20000E+01 cone. I .140OOE-21 .140OOE-31 .190OOE-21 .19000E-21 cone. 1.18000E+3 I IDA-G2 I .60000E+21 .37690E+31 I I .11400E+11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I IWRF-Gll .44000E+01 .10545E+21 I I .28200E+11 I I Endosutfan, total plus endosutfan sulfate iFaciLj max. i Site i Max. max. i i Max. I I Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .54000E+31 I .81000E+41 cone. I .20000E+11 .20000E+11 .56000i 14 .560OOE-11 cone. 1.61000E+7 I jWRF-G1j .95000E+01 I .29000E+01 I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of EnvironmentaL Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL. NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Endrin plus andrin aldehyde Si IFaciL.1 Max. i te Max. I Max. I Max. Igroup I cone. I. FSSC I .200OOE-11 .45000E+21 cone. I .32157E+41 .30000E+31 .41000E+31 cone. I .81000E+01 .81000E+01 .230OOE-21 .230OOE-21 cone. 1.31000E+6 I IDA-G2 I I .53000E+11 I I I .21000E+01 I I I I I I 1WRF-G11 .10400E+11 .39786E+11 I I .29100E+21 FLuoranthene iFaciLA Max. i Site i Max. i Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .60000E+31 .36000E+41 cone. I .42550E+61 I .54000E+51 cone. I .37000E+31 .37000E+31 I I cone. 1.41000E+8 I IDA-G2 I .68000E+21 .11874E+41 I I I I IWRF-GII .11000E+31 .17456E+41 I I .12000E+41 I I I I I I I JWRF-G21 .46000E+21 .16172E+41 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Fluorene lFacil.1 Max. Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .35000E+21 .64000E+31 cone. I.42000E+61 I .54000E+51 cone. I .14000E+51 .14000E+51 I I cone. 1.41000E+8 I IDA-G2 I .28000E+21 I I I I 1WRF-G11 I I I I .93000E+21 Heptachtor iFacit.i Max. Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I .23520E+21 .30000E+31 .70000E+01 cone. I .210OOE-21 .210OOE-31 .360OOE-211.360OOE-21 cone. 1.64000E+3 I ]DA-G2 I I I I .38000E+01 I Heptachtor epoxide lFacit.1 Max. Site 11 Max. I Max. I I Max. I Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .12320E+11 .30000E+31 .35000E+01 cone. I I .110OOE-31 I .360OOE-21 cone. 1.31000E+3 I IDA-G2 I I .20000E+01 I I IWRF-Gll .10000E+01 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmentat Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRET VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRET Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene iFacill Max. i Site i Max. Max. max. Igroup-I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+11 cone. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I cone. 1.39000E+4 I IDA-G2 I .16000E+21 I I I I 1WRF-GII .19000E+31 I .53000E+31 Methoxychtor lFaC11.1 Max. I Site Max. max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I I I .68000E+41 cone. I I .300OOE-11 I cone. 1.51000E+7 I IDA-G2 I I .23000E+11 L Naphthalene IFacit.1 Max. I Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .34000E+31 .21000E+41 cone. I I I .54000E+51 cone. I I cone. 1.41000E+8 I IDA-G2 I .14000E+21 I I I 1WRF-G11 I .32000E+21 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of EnvironmentaL Quality's Northern Region -- continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tfssue, ug/kq (ppb) wet weight j Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT PCBs, calculated total (ArocLor 1260 criteria used) IFacit.1 Max. I Site I Max. Max. I Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .50000E+21 .40000E+31 cone. I .14040E+21 .20000E+41 .41000E+01 cone. I .450OOE-31 .450OOE-41 .300OOE-11 .300OOE-11 cone. 1.37000E+3 I IDA-G2 I .25000E+31 I .44000E+31 I I I I I I I I I I I 1WRF-G11 .34000E+21 I I .15000E+41 I I I .15000E+21 I I I IIOOOE+41 IWRF-G21 .10000E+61 I .15000E+11 I I I I Phenanthrene iFaciLA Max. I Site Max. i i Max. i i i Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .22500E+31 .13800E+41 cone. I I I cone. I I I cone. I I IDA-G2 I .28000E+31 .43187E+31 I I I I IWRF-GII .35000E+21 .62415E+31 I I .95000E+31 I I I I I I (:j I I I IWRF-G21,.94000E+21 .26343E+41 I I I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Northern Region -- continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), us/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry' wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Phthalic acid, diethyL ester lFacil.1 Max. Site I Max. Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I .87600E+71 I .11000E+71 conc. I I .12000E+61 I conc. 1.82000E+9 I 1WRF-GII I I I I .90000E+11 Phthatic acid, di-(2-ethythexyL) ester (bis(2-ethyLhexL)phthalate) iFacRj Max. i Site Max. i Max. Max. I I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I .76700E+41 I .23000E+31 conc. I .59000E+21 .59000E+11 I conc. 1.20000E+6 I IDA-G2 I I I .30000E+11 I I I Pyrene jFacfL.j Max. Site I I Max. Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I.35000E+31 .22000E+41 conc. I .33000E+61 I .41000E+51 conc. I .11000E+51 .11000E+51 I conc. 1.31000E+B I IDA-G2 I.59000E+21 I I I I I 1WRF-GII .14000E+31 I I I .10000E+41 I I I I I IWRF-G21 .23000E+31 I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmentat Quality's Northern Region continued Sediment, ug/kg Cppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water Cambient or effluent), ug/L Cppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT XyLene, o- (1,2-dimethylbenzene, 1,2-dimethyt) IFacit.i Max. I Site I Max. I max. .1 Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I I .27000E+71 cone. I I cone. 1.1000E+10 I IWRF-G21 I I I I I.30000E+11 L iTotaL regional i i lexceedances: 1 0 1 11 1 6 1 1 3 1 0 1 9 1 3 1 5 1 6 1 5 1 2 1 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Piedmont Region Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Phthelic acid, di-(n-butyt) ester FaciL.1 Max. Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I.10680E+71 I .14000E+61 conc. I I.12000E+51 I conc. 1.10000E+9 I jCC-G1 I I .11000E+21 I I I - I j PhthaLic acid, di-(2-ethyLhexyL) ester (bfs(2-ethyLhexL)phthaLate) IFaciL.1 Max. I Site Max. I I Max. I Max. I I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I.76700E+41 I .23000E+31 conc. I .59000E+21 .59000E+11 I conc. 1.20000E+6 I ICC-GI I I .12000E+31 ITotaL regional lexceedances: 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 I-J Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT WHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT ALdrin IFaciL.i Max. Site I max. I I max. I I max. I Igroup I conc. I OSSC I I I conc. I .65380E+11 I .19000E+01 conc. I .140OOE-21 .140OOE-31 .13000E+01 I conc. 1.17000E+3 I JACL-G11 .29500E+11 I I Anthracene iFaciLA Max. I Site I Max. i Max. Max. I I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .85000E+21 .96000E+31 conc. I .33000E+71 I .41000E+61 conc. I .11000E+61 .11000E+61 I I conc. 1.31000E+9 I A IHN-GI I .28000E+21 INCE-G11 .17000E+21 I I I I I INWS-G11 .22000E+21 86nz[alanthracene iFacit., Max. I Site I max. Max. max. I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .23000E+31 .16000E+41 conc. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+11 conc. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I conc. 1.39000E+4 I 1DRI-G11 .54000E+21 I I I I I I IHN-G1 I .13000E+31 I I I I I INWS-G11 .18000E+31 Table 4 continue d. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Benzenehexachtoride, alpha- (atpha-BHC; atpha-hexachtorocyclohexane) __7 IFaciL.I Max. Site Max. Max. I I Max. I [group I cone. FSSC I cone. I .16900E+11 I .50000E+01 cone. I I .130OOE-11 I I cone. 1.45000E+3 I INN-GI I I I I I I .180OOE-11 I I I BenzenehexachLoride, gamma- (gamma-BHC; gamma-hexachtorocyctohexane; Lindane) iFacit., Max. site Max. I Max. I Max. 1group I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I .32500E+.41 I 24000E+11 cone. I .25000E+21 .630OOE-11 .100OOE-11 I cone. 1.22000E+4 I IHN-GI I I I I I I .210OOE-11 INCE-G11 I I I I .77000E+01 I I I I I Benzo[blftuoranthene (benztelacephenenthrytene) iFacft.i Max. i Site i Max. i i Max. i Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+11 cone. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I cone. 1.39000E+4 I JACL-GII .10500E+31 I I I I I I I I I I I JENF-GII .65000E+21 I I I I I I I I I I IDR1-G1I .16000E+31 I I I I I I I I I I I TabLe 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Enviromentat Quatity's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kq (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effLuent), ug/L (ppb) Soft, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Benzo[blftuoranthene (benz[elacephenanthryiene) continued max. lFacit.1 Max. I Site I max. I max. I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I.93300E+ll I .43000E+ll conc. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I conc. 1.39000E+4 I IHN-GI I .28000E+31 I INWS-GII .36000E+31 I I I I I I I I BenzoCkIfluoranthene lFaciL.1 Max. I Site I max. I Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I I conc. Ii93300E+ll I .43000E+21 conc. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I conc. 1.39000E+5 I IDRI-Gil .53000E+21 IHN-Gl I .87000E+21 I I I I I INWS-GII .14000E+31 I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Qu'aLity's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight SoiL, ug/kg dry wt Tissue, ug/kg (Ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Benzotalpyrene iFaciLA Max. i Site Max. max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .40000E+31 .25000E+41 cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+01 cone. I .31100E+01 .311OOE-11 I cone. 1.39000E+3 I 1DRI-G11 .63000E+21 jHN-G1 I .15000E+31 I INWS-Q11 .28000E+31 I I I I I I Caprotactam iFacit.1 max. i Site i I max. I max. I max. Igroup, I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I I I .68000E+61 cone. I I I cone. 1.51000E+9 I JACL-G11 I .80000E+11 ChLordane, total iFacitA Max. i Site Max. i Max. max. I I [group I cone. I FSSC I .50000E+01 .60000E+11 cone. I .83190E+21 .30000E+31 .24000E+11 cone. I .590OOE-21 .590OOE-31 .400OOE-21 .400OOE-21 cone. 1.22000E+4 I I i i A JACL-GII .39000E+21 .1 1 I I I jHN-Q1 I I I .32000E+11 I I I I I INCE-G11 I I .27000E+11 I I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, uq/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (Ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kq dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRRT Chlordane, total continued lFacit-I Max. Site I I Max. I Max. Max. I Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .50000E+01 .60000E+11 cone. I .83190E+21 .30000E+31 .24000E+11 cone. I .590OOE-21 .590OOE-31 .430OOE-21 .430OOE-21 cone. 1.22000E+4 I INWS-G11 .94500E+11 I I I .68000E+11 Chrysene iFaciL.i Max. I Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I I cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+31 cone. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I I cone. 1.39000E+6 I ISNF-GII .37000E+21 I I I I I I I I I 1DRI-GII IOOOOE+31 I jHN-G1 I .14000E+31 I I INCE-GII .30000E+21 I I I I I IM-G11 .26000E+31 I I I I f J Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) SOL, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT L DDD, total max. ,Facit.1 max. I Site Max. max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I -.20000E+11 .20000E+21 conc. I I I conc. .1 1 conc. I JACL-GII .49400E+11 JBNF-G21 .60000E+01 I I I . I I jNWS-G1j .19900E+21 DDE, total iFaciL.1' Max. i Site max. I Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .20000E+11 .15000E+21 conc. I conc. conc. JACL-G11 .26500E+11 I I I IBNF-GII .81000E+11 I I I INCE-G11 .40000E+11 1 1 1 .jNWS-G1j .10800E+21 OPP Table 4 continued.. Virginia Dept. of Environmental 6uality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb). Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT DDT, total IFecit.i Max. i Site i I Max. i Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .10000E+11 .70000E+11 conc. I conc. conc. JACL-G11 .95200E+11 I I I I INCE-GII .11100E+11 I I I INWS-G11 .12700E+21 I DDD/DDE/DDT, calculated total Max. IFacflj Max. I Site I I Max. I Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I I conc. I .31624E+31 .50000E+41 .93000E+11 conc. I .590OOE-21 .590OOE-31 .100OOE-21 .100OOE-21 conc. 1.84000E+4 I JACL-G11 I I.38000E+11 I I I I I IBNF-G11 I I.32880E+21 I I I I I 1DRI-GII I I.32000E+11 I I I I I IHN-G1 I I I.12900E+21 I I I I I I I INCE-GII I I.15900E+21 I I I I I I INWS-GII I I I.42200E+21 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quatity's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Dibenz(a,h)anthracene lFacit.1 Max. I Site Max. Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .60000E+21 .26000E+31 cone. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+01 cone. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I cone. 1.39000E+3 I INWS-G11 .38000E+21 I I I DieLdrin iFecit.i Max. I Site i Mak. i i Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .200OOE-11 .80000E+11 cone. I .65380E+11 I .20000E+01 cone. I .140OOE-21 .140OOE-31 .190OOE-21 .190OOE-21 cone. 1.18000E+3 I JACL-G11 .13600E+11 .12733E+31 I I I I I I IBNF-G11 .47300E+11 .12766E+31 I I I I IHN-G1 I I I I .32000E+11 I EndosuLfan, total plus endosuLfan sulfate lFacil-I Max. Site Max. Max. Max. I I Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I .54000E+31 I .81000E+41 cone. I .20000E+11 .20000E+11 .870OOE721 .870OOE-21 cone. 1.61000E+7 I JACL-G11 .26100E+11 Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kq (ppb) wet weight water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soft, ug/kg dry wt NERL. NERM VTSV FDA FRBT WHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Fluoranthene IFacit.1 max. Site I max. max. Max. I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .60000E+31 .36000E+41 conc. I .42550E+61 I .54000E+51 conc. I .37000E+31 .37000E+31 I conc. 1.41000E+8 I JACL-G11 .12500E+31 .41229E+41 I IONF-G11 .27000E+21 .12065E+51 I I I I I I IDRI-Gli .18000E+31 .12566E+51 IHN-GI I .19000E+31 .21109E+41 I INCE-G11 .24000E+21 .46207E+31 I I I I I I INWS-GII .33000E+31 .20023E+41 I Heptachlor iFaciLA Max. I Site max. Max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I I conc. I.23520E+21 .30000E+31 .70000E+01 conc. I .210OOE-21 .210OOE-31 .380OOE-21 .380OOE-21 conc. 1.64000E+3 I INCE-GII I I I .50000E+01 I I I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kq (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) Soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT Heptachtor epoxfde iFacit.i Max. Site Max. Max. 1 max. A Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I I conc. I .12320E+11 .30000E+31 .350005+01 conc. I I .110OOE-31 I .360OOE-21 conc. 1.31000E+3 I JACL-GII .29600E+11 Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene lFacit.1 max. I Site max. max. Max. Igroup I conc. I FSSC I I conc. I .93300E+11 I .43000E+11 conc. I .31100E+01 .310OOE-11 I conc. 1.39000E+4 I A 1DRI-GII .42000E+21 I I I jHN-G1 I .12000E+31 I I I INWS-G11 .20000E+31 I Naphthalene iFaciLA Max. i Site Max. i Max. Max. I I Igroup I conc. I FSSC I .34000E+31 .21000E+41 conc. I I I .54000E+51 conc. I I I conc. 1.41000E+8 I INCE-GII .12000E+21 I Table 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental. Quality's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or effluent), ug/L (ppb) soil, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT PCBs, calculated total (Aroclor 1260 criteria used) iFacit.i Max. Site Max. Max. max. Igroup I conc.. I FSSC I .50000E+21 .40000E+31 cone. I .14040E+21 .20000E+41 .41000E+01 cone. I .450OOE-31 .450OOE-41 .300OOE-11 .300OOE-11 cone. 1.37000E+3 I JACL-G11 .40000E+21 I .13000E+21 I I . I I I IBNF-GII .21900E+31 I I I .73000E+11 I I I I I I I I I I I 1DRI-G11 .43300E+41 I I I .28000E+51 I .96500E+21 I I jHN-G1 I .71000E+21 I I I .39000E+21 INCE-G11 I I I .16000E+21 I I .14000E+01 I I I I I I I INWS-G11 .27000E+31 I I .18000E+21 Phenanthrene Site Max. max. max. IFacit.1 Max. Igrou'p I cone. I FSSC I .22500E+31 .13800E+41 cone. I cone. I I cone. I I 1DRI-G11 .35000E+21 .45706E+41 jHN-G1 I .78000E+21 .76776E+31 INCE-GII .41000E+21 .16521E+31 I I I I INWS-GII .13000E+31 .71594E+31 I Tabte 4 continued. Virginia Dept. of Environmental Quatfty's Tidewater Region continued Sediment, ug/kg (ppb) dry weight Tissue, ug/kg (ppb) wet weight Water (ambient or efftuent), ug/L (ppb) Soit, ug/kg dry wt NERL NERM VTSV FDA FRBT VHHO FHHO VALC FALC FRBT PhthaLic acid, di-(2-ethyLhexyl) ester (bis(2-ethyLhext)phthaLate) IFacfE.1 Max. I Site I Max. I I Max. I I Max. I Igroup I cone. I FSSC I I cone. I .76700E+41 I .23000E+31 cone. I .59000E+21 .59000E+ll I cone. 1.20000E+6 I INWS-G71 I I I .49000E+31 Pyrene lFacit., Max. Site Max. I Max. Max. Igroup I cone. I FSSC I .35000E+31 .22000E+41 cone. I .33000E+61 I .41000E+51 cone. I .11000E+51 J1000E+51 I cone. 1.31000E+8 I JACL-GlI .47000E+21 I IBNF-GlI .33000E+21 I I I I I I I IDRI-Gll .14000E+31 I I I JHN-Gl I .24000E+31 INCE-GlI .16000E+21 I I I I I I I INWS-GII .30000E+31 I I I ITotal regionaL lexceedances: 0 17 5 1 4 14 3 4 3 2 0 Table 4 continued. Notes: 1A description of each facility group is provided in Table 1. A complete Listing of analytical results by station is provided in Table A-1. 2Standards and criteria used in this table are Listed in Table 8- -1. Sources are Listed below: FSSC Draft national sediment quality criteria values, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 8/12/92. Values are site-specific, based upon sample TOC. NERL The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the national status and trends program, effects range low, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1991. NERM The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants tested in the national status and trends program, effects range median, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1991. VTSV Virginia Dept. Environmental Quality draft screening values for tissue, 11/26/93. Calculated by multiplying Virginia water quality standard (see WHO below) by bioaccumulation factor. For EPA 304(a) compounds without Virginia water quality standards, EPA's 304(a) criteria were used (see FHHO below). FDA National seafood safety manual - appendix D: action levels, tolerances and other values for poisonous or deleterious substances in seafood, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 1988. -6 FRBT EPA Region III risk-based concentrations, ver. 7.0, 10/5/93. Based upon target cancer risk of 10 VHHO Virginia water quality standards - human health: other surface waters (non-water supply VR680-21-01, Commonwealth of Virginia, 5/20/92. For Virginia-cLassified carcinogens, standards are based upon target cancer risk of 10 FHHO Human health criteria for consumption of organisms only; EPA's Section 304(a) criteria for priority toxic pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 CFR Part 131 Section 131.36, 12/22/92. For EPA-cLassified carcinogens, criteria are based upon target cancer risk of 10 .6 VALC Virginia water quality standards - aquatic Life: chronic, VR680-21-01, Commonwealth of Virginia, 5/20/92. VALC Aquatic life criteria -- continuous; EPA's Section 304(a) criteria for priority toxic pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 CFR Part 131 Section 131.36, 12/22/92. re ALL DRAFT So/ L- wA r*Z - L-Y @cD) L (-Ar(@@z 10 S ejlm ev r ficil. I DRAFT 'Sol L- -3 wAl 44@ d.w @0) L IJ t@ r*z r DRAFT Its r,-1- ---------- - rca . ..... ....- ------------ . ...... .... @22 DRAFT COD 0 (9/1 4JFII . ............ J4, [-wlm Ci . ............ DRAFT fic a I r-/ ),7 SOIL- A I-C/Z -X rx 'lip ejt;r*z ejlmei DRAFT I-Lc -- -------- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -- - - - - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . DRAFT le cc-r- 04 rea .5,4,4 e,4 I- ... ..... .. ----- -- ---- It (116 DRAFT A c I L I Tr' Hi?-s -Z, (.Arct)--9, 14 e,4 T- . . ....... ..... ........... .. ......... 13 DRAFT 601 /,v 4A scj"MeN ------ ---- 7- 7 . .... . . ..... ... .. ....... . ell OQ ......... iIt Tr I commonwealth of Virginia DePartment of Environmental: Quality Regions 0. 23 46 69 WN c UG it WX= Mug Conc lusions Study obiectives. DRAFT objectives of the 1993 Virginia DEQ CZM BI study were to: 1) assess risks at study sites; 2) assess and refine monitoring protocols; and 3) assess contract laboratory abilities. The 1993 Virginia DEQ CZM BI study met the identified objectives. Human health risks were identified and estimated at eight sites in Virginia's CZM area. The range of human health risks was estimated to be 100-10-6. Monitoring protocols were assessed and refinements were identified. Specific refinements are discussed below under recommendations. The performance of the study's contract laboratory was assessed through the use of split samples with the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, as well as with sample blanks, matrix spikes, analytical surrogates, and other internal quality control mechanisms. Laboratory ability was concluded to be highly variable, and tended to correlate with particular sample matrices and project time periods. Laboratory ability tended to be best with water samples.- and less with biota and sediment samples. Laboratory ability also tended to improve with time. The laboratory assessment portion of the CZM BI study highlighted several specific areas of the analytical protocol and laboratory operating procedures in need of reevaluation for future studies. Issues highlighted during the course of the CZM BI study included: 1) The lack of toxicology information and environmental risk information on.currently unprofiled compounds. This presents a major setback when evaluating total risk from bioconcentratable compounds; .2) Control strategies for bioconcentratble pollutants will need to include sediment standards and a consistent set of risk assessment criteria; and 3) risk based programs for monitoring indigenous fish and .shellfish tissues will need to beiestablished and supported in conjunction with the establishment of risk based assessment criteria. Recommendations. An overall recommendation for future study of bioconcentratble compounds in Virginia's CZM are would be to screen additional sites, particularly those 'known to be, or suspected to be, releasing COC. Other recommendations for future study of bioconcentratable compounds in Virginia's CZM area are presented by Pite. Dahlctren Naval Weapons Lab. DRAFT The DA-G2 site is situated on the shore of the Potomac River, a large, tidal and open surface water environment. Consequently, fish may not be sufficiently resident in the impact are to establish maximum tissue concentrations of COC. Because of the high risk estimates (10-3) for this site, follow up sampling of stormwater from the pesticide rinse are drainage swale should be done in order to determine if pesticides are migrating off site. Stormwater sampling should be complemented by live box studies, using shellfish species and/or surrogate organism systems, to determine the maximum potential tissue concentrations for the COC. Studies should be completed by August 1994 to allow time for a Virginia Health Department Fish Advisory survey if necessary. Woodbridge Research Facility WRF-Gl.' The WRF-G1 site is similar to the Dahlgren site. The site is: 1) on the shore of the Potomac River; 2) has a large, tidal and open surface water environment; and 3) has a high risk estimate (10'). Future study recommendations include follow up stormwater sampling complimented-by live box and/or surrogate organism system studies. Studies should be completed by August 1994 to allow time for a Virginia Health Department Fish Advisory survey if necessary. Woodbridge Research Facility WRF-G2. The WRF-G2 site is basically a small stream site. However, two problems exist with its current state of characterization: 1) the source of PCBs has not been identified; and 2) no tissue samples have been screened. Because of the site's high risk estimate (10-') follow up studies should included.additional water sampling to identify input sources, reattempting to collect indigenous organism tissue samples, and deploying liveboxes and/or surrogate organism systems. Studies should be completed by August 1994 to allow time for a Virginia Health Department Fish Advisory survey if necessary. Allied Colloids Problems at ACL-G1 appear to be attributable to sediment contamination. The ACL-G1 site is in association with the Nansemond River and therefore must be considered a large, tidal, surface water environment. Because of the site's moderately high risk estimate (10') a follow up study using live boxes, surrogate organism systems, and/or a thorough indigenous benthic survey is recommended. Boykins Narrow Fabrics. DRAFT Problems at BNF-G1 appear to be attributable to sediment contamination. Background sediment data indicate historical or episodic releases of COC have occurred from the Boykins Narrow Fabrics facility. Follow up studies using live boxes and/or surrogate organisms systems should be made to determine if the moderate CZM BI study risk estimate (101) is accurate. Driver Naval Transmitting Facility. The tissue samples at the DRI-G1 site were the only tissue samples to exceed the FDA's PCB action level of 2 ppm. Maximum PCB tissue concentrations at DRI-G1 approached 20 ppm. The site is: 1) associated with the Nansemond River; 2) has a small to medium, tidal, open surface water environment; and 3) has a high risk estimate (10()) . Future study recommendations include follow up water sampling complimented by live box and/or surrogate organism system studies. Studies should be completed by August 1994 to allow time for a Virginia Health Department Fish Advisory survey if necessary. HRSD Nansemond-STP Data are generally inconclusive about bioconcentratable compound problems at the HN1-G1 site. Due to: 1) the numerous potential input sources of COC in Hampton Roads; 2) the low correlation between HN1-G1 water, sediment, and tissue data; and 3) the site's moderate risk estimate (101), follow up study's should be reserved for inclusion in a broader study of bioconcentratable compounds in Hampton Roads. New Church Enercry Associates. Data are generally inconclusive about bioconcentratable compound problems at the NCE-G1 site. However, data indicate a potential problem with PCBs, Chlordane, and DDT. Because of the site's high risk estimate (10-') follow up water sampling should be done to identify sources. Water sampling should be complemented with a live box and/or surrogate organism study. Yorktown Naval WeaponB Statio DRAFT Problems at NWS-G1 appear to be attributable to sediment contamination. Sediment data indicate historical or episodic releases of COC have occurred around the Roosevelt Pond tributaries. Follow up studies to identify: 1) PCB sources; 2) maximum potential tissue levels; and 3) tissue contamination levels in Roosevelt Pond fish should be made to determine if the moderate high CZM BI study.risk estimate (104) is accurate. Literature Cited URAFT From Intro: Yosie 1993 From Methods: ASTM D422-63 Method for psrticle analysis of sails. 1990 VIMS 1991 EPA methods 8100/8270, 8080, 625, TOC, AVS, GC-MS cal, EPA 3620 Va WQ Stds NOAA EPA sed crit. FDA action levels EPA RIII RBC tables DEQ draft screening values for fish tissue Sediment: 0-.M XXX (19XX), TOC EPA 415.1 (19XX), AVS EPA (19XX), Grain size - XXX (19XX) QA (EPA 1990), (EPA 19XX). From Discussion: table 2: VA WQS EPA pri. poll table 4: FSQC NOAA FHHO FALC VHHO VALC VRTC FRBC From Appendix A: From Appendix B: NUMERICA: Chemfate Log P QSAR IRIS From Appendix C: NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR LIBRARY 3 6668 14111910 9