Tamar Environmental Monitoring Program Tamar Field and Pipeline

Transcription

Tamar Environmental Monitoring Program
Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey
November 2013
Prepared for:
Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd
Ackerstein Towers, Building D
12 Abba Eben Boulevard
Herzliya Pituach, Israel 46725
Prepared by:
CSA Ocean Sciences Inc.
8502 SW Kansas Avenue
Stuart, Florida 34997
AUTHOR CERTIFICATION SIGNATURE
Project Manager, Yossi Azov, Ph.D.
Director ‒ Israel Branch
E-mail: [email protected]
Project Manager, Elad Mills
Project Scientist, Debbie Fawcett
Senior Scientist
Program Manager, Christopher J. Kelly, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist – Marine Ecologist
Project Manager, Robert Mulcahy
Vice President, Energy Business Line Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd (Noble Energy) has constructed a subsea gas production and
transportation system connecting the deepwater Tamar Gas Field (Tamar Field) to the Tamar Offshore
Receiving and Processing Platform (Tamar Platform). The Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP)
and Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MEWR) required Noble Energy to develop and implement
an environmental monitoring program, which consisted of a minimal number of sampling stations and
generally characterized the physical, chemical, and biological environment of the pipeline route.
The primary objective of the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey, which was conducted by CSA Ocean
Sciences Inc. from 25 to 31 March 2013, was to characterize the exisiting environmental conditions along
the pipeline. The sampling effort consisted of 1) hydrographic profiling of the water column within the
Tamar Field; 2) collection of water samples at specific depths in the water column within the Tamar
Field; and 3) collection of sediment and infaunal samples within the Tamar Field and along the pipeline
route. For the Tamar Field, sampling was conducted in three geographic strata, and three sampling
stations were randomly located within each of these strata. At these stations, sampling consisted of
collection of seawater and sediment/infaunal samples and video data. For the pipeline route, sampling
was divided among strata that were defined by water depth. Stations were randomly located within each
stratum, and only sediment and infaunal samples were collected.
Seawater samples collected near the seafloor in the Tamar Field survey area were analyzed to determine
concentrations of total suspended solids (TSS), nutrients (total nitrogen [TN] and total phosphorus [TP]),
total metals, hydrocarbons, and radionuclides. TSS values averaged 6.1 mg L-1, and TN and TP
concentrations in seawater samples were generally low and nearly uniform throughout the water column
within the survey area. All seawater total metals concentrations in the Tamar Field samples were below
the Criterion Continuous Concentration reference values, which are values used to evaluate possible
effects on organisms. Alkanes and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) were not detected in seawater
from the survey area. Total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations in seawater averaged
70.2 ± 52.4 ng L-1, and concentrations of radionuclides in seawater (radium [Ra] 226 and Ra 228)
averaged 0.12 ± 0.08 pCi L-1 and 0.11 ± 0.12 pCi L-1, respectively. Overall, values for seawater samples
were generally at or below detection limits, similar to results from previous baseline surveys in the
Levantine Basin, and below the proposed Mediterranean Sea water quality standards in Israel (when
applicable).
Sediment samples were analyzed to determine grain size distribution and concentrations of total organic
carbon (TOC), total metals, hydrocarbons, and radionuclides. Analyses of sediment grain size indicated
silty-clay sediments were predominant in waters depths greater than 450 m, clayey-silt sediments were
predominant at depths between 450 and 70 m, and the sand component increased steadily between depths
of 70 and 20 m. Concentrations of metals in sediments in the vicinity of the Tamar Field wellsites
generally were within the range of normal deep-sea sediments (i.e., mean marine sediments, continental
crust), with the exception of arsenic and copper. These arsenic and copper concentrations are considered
to be ambient for the seafloor of this region. Repeated measurements of arsenic and copper
concentrations within the Levantine Basin have consistently yielded values higher than those reported for
mean marine sediments and continental crust in locations with minimal anthropogenic activity or
influences. Concentrations of radionuclides (Ra 226 and Ra 228, thorium [Th] 228) in sediments ranged
averaged 0.35 ± 0.10 pCi g-1 for Ra 226, 0.58 ± 0.22 pCi g-1 for Ra 228, and 0.65 ± 0.05 pCi g-1 for
Th 228. Concentrations of TPH in sediments ranged from 6.0 ± 3.2 to 48.9 ± 10.5 µg g-1, and
concentrations of PAHs in sediments ranged from 34.4 ± 4.8 to 274.1 ± 22.7 ng g-1. Overall, values for
sediment samples were generally at or below detection limits and similar to results from previous baseline
surveys in the Levantine Basin.
ES-1
The infaunal assemblage differed significantly among depth strata. At shallow water (≤300 m) stations,
species diversity was moderate to high and there was high organism abundance. Stations in deeper water
(>300 m) had moderate to low species diversity and low organism abundance. Polychaete worms were
the most abundant taxa collected from all survey strata, accounting for approximately 50% of all
organisms collected. Crustaceans (shrimp-like animals) and bivalves were the two most prevalent
infaunal taxa after polychaetes.
An undisturbed smooth and relatively flat soft bottom seafloor was seen within the survey area. No hard
bottom substrate or chemosynthetic communities were observed. There was biological activity at most of
the sampling stations in the Tamar Field, and observations included fauna and bioturbation (i.e.,
biologically maintained burrows and mounds). As may be expected for a soft bottom deepwater
environment where food availability is low, fauna observed on the seafloor were sparse. The organisms
most commonly observed from the video data were fishes and shrimps. Small groupings of patterned
burrows and small conical mounds likely created by polychaetes were observed in the soft sediments.
All observations indicated a relatively pristine deepwater environment that would be expected at a
oligotrophic eastern Mediterranean location far from riverine discharges and terrigenous sediment
sources.
ES-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................ iv
LIST OF IMAGES ........................................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................... vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................. ES-1
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..........................................................................1
1.1
1.2
BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................... 1
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................. 1
2.0 SURVEY DESIGN ........................................................................................................................4
3.0 FIELD METHODS .......................................................................................................................6
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
VESSEL OPERATION, NAVIGATION, AND REQUIRED PERSONNEL ............................ 6
REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE ....................................................................................... 6
WATER COLUMN SAMPLING ............................................................................................... 7
SEDIMENT AND INFAUNAL SAMPLING ............................................................................ 7
VIDEOGRAPHY AND SONAR .............................................................................................. 10
QUALITY CONTROL ............................................................................................................. 10
3.6.1 Quality Control Measures .............................................................................................. 10
3.6.2 Sample Handling and Transport ..................................................................................... 11
3.6.3 Document and Data Security.......................................................................................... 11
4.0 DATA PROCESSING AND LABORATORY METHODS ................................................................13
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
HYDROGRAPHIC PROFILES ................................................................................................ 13
SEAWATER AND SEDIMENT ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 13
4.2.1 Seawater ......................................................................................................................... 15
4.2.2 Sediment ......................................................................................................................... 16
INFAUNA ................................................................................................................................. 18
VIDEOGRAPHY AND SONAR .............................................................................................. 18
5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION .....................................................................................................19
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
SEA STATE .............................................................................................................................. 19
HYDROGRAPHIC DATA ....................................................................................................... 19
SEAWATER AND SEDIMENT ANALYSIS .......................................................................... 20
5.3.1 Seawater ......................................................................................................................... 20
5.3.2 Sediment ......................................................................................................................... 26
INFAUNA ................................................................................................................................. 36
VIDEOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................................... 47
SONAR DATA ......................................................................................................................... 56
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(CONTINUED)
Page
6.0 LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................58
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................60
Appendix A: Scope of Work/Sampling and Analysis Plan for the Tamar Field and
Pipeline Survey............................................................................................................ A-1
Appendix B: Vessel Specifications ................................................................................................... B-1
Appendix C: Seawater Total Metals Analytical Data Sheets............................................................ C-1
Appendix D: Seawater Hydrocarbons Analytical Data Sheets ......................................................... D-1
Appendix E: Seawater and Sediment Radionuclide Analytical Data Sheets .................................... E-1
Appendix F: Sediment Grain Size Analytical Data Sheets................................................................ F-1
Appendix G: Sediment Total Organic Carbon Analytical Data Sheets............................................. G-1
Appendix H: Sediment Total Metals Analytical Data Sheets ........................................................... H-1
Appendix I: Sediment Hydrocarbons Analytical Data Sheets ...........................................................I-1
ii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1
Summary of sampling conducted for the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey .......................... 4
2
Processing and storage requirements for seawater samples collected for analysis................. 7
3
Processing and storage requirements for sediment sampling parameters ............................... 8
4
Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, and reporting limits of
quantification for seawater samples ...................................................................................... 13
5
Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, and reporting limits of
quantification for sediment samples ..................................................................................... 14
6
Station concentrations (mg L-1) and mean concentrations (± standard deviation
[SD]) of total suspended solids (TSS) in seawater samples collected near the
seafloor in the Tamar Field ................................................................................................... 23
7
Station concentrations (mg L-1) and mean concentrations (± standard deviation
[SD]) of total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) in seawater samples
collected near the seafloor in the Tamar Field ...................................................................... 23
8
Metals concentrations (µg L-1) in seawater collected from Tamar Field sampling
stations, with comparisons to toxicity reference values (Criterion Continuous
Concentration [CCC]) (Buchman, 2008), the proposed Mediterranean Sea water
quality standards in Israel (MoEP, 2002), and mean Levantine Basin baseline
survey data ............................................................................................................................ 24
9
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations (ng L-1) and means
(± standard deviation) in seawater collected from the Tamar Field ..................................... 25
10
Mean and combined mean concentrations of radionuclides (radium 226 [Ra 226]
and radium 228 [Ra 228]) in seawater from the Tamar Field. Levantine Basin
baseline survey data are provided for comparison................................................................ 26
11
Grain size distribution and sediment type at sediment sampling stations in the
Tamar Field and along the Tamar pipeline route .................................................................. 27
12
Total metals concentrations (ppm) in sediments collected along the Tamar pipeline
route. Effects Range Low (ELM) and Effects Range Median (ERM) values
(Buchman, 2008) are provided for comparison .................................................................... 30
13
Mean (± standard deviation) total metals concentrations (ppm) in sediments
collected from the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey strata, with comparisons to
mean and range of metals concentrations within seafloor sediments of the Levantine
Basin (CSA surveys), mean marine sediments (Salomons and Förstner, 1984),
continental crust (Wedepohl, 1995), and Effects Range Low (ERL) and Effects
Range Median (ERM) values (Buchman, 2008)................................................................... 32
14
Mean alkane concentrations in sediments collected from survey sampling strata................ 33
iii
LIST OF TABLES
(CONTINUED)
Table
Page
15
Mean polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) concentrations in survey sampling
strata pipeline route............................................................................................................... 34
16
Mean (± standard deviaton) concentrations of radionuclides (radium 226,
radium 228, and thorium 228) in sediments collected from the Tamar Field ....................... 35
17
Taxonomic listing and total abundance distribution of major taxa and subgroups in
infaunal samples collected from the Tamar Field strata (1,700 m water depth) ................... 37
18
infaunal samples collected from stations in the 1,400 to 1,700 m depth stratum ................. 38
19
infaunal samples collected from stations in the 900 to 1,400 m depth stratum .................... 38
20
infaunal samples collected from stations in the 300 to 900 m depth stratum ....................... 39
21
infaunal samples collected from stations in the 200 to 300 m depth stratum ....................... 40
22
infaunal samples collected from stations located in the 20 to 200 m depth stratum............. 42
23
Benthic community parameters at infaunal sampling stations during the Tamar
Field and Pipeline Survey ..................................................................................................... 46
24
Total and mean numbers of fishes and shrimp observed at the Tamar Field wellsites......... 55
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1
Location of the Tamar Field and pipeline relative to the Israeli coastline .............................. 2
2
Configuration of sampling strata and locations of sampling stations for the
Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey............................................................................................ 5
3
Hydrographic profiles of the water column collected at Station TF7 on
26 March 2013: temperature, dissolved oxygen (mg L-1), and salinity (left), and
fluorescence, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen (% saturation) (right). .................................. 19
4
Locations of seawater, sediment, and infauna sampling stations and video survey
tracks in the Tamar Field in relation to existing wellsites and infrastructure. ...................... 21
5
Locations of sediment and infauna sampling stations along the Tamar pipeline in
relation to the coast of Israel ................................................................................................. 22
6
Ternary diagram showing grain size characteristics of sediments collected from
Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey strata ................................................................................ 28
7
Percent sand composition of seafloor sediments collected from Tamar Field and
Pipeline Survey strata ........................................................................................................... 28
8
Mean percent total organic carbon (TOC) composition (± standard error [indicated
by black error bars]) of seafloor sediments collected from Tamar Field and Pipeline
Survey strata ......................................................................................................................... 29
9
Mean (± standard error [indicated by black error bars]) total petroleum
hydrocarbons (TPH) concentrations in sediments collected from survey sampling
strata...................................................................................................................................... 34
10
Mean (± standard error [indicated by black error bars]) total polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations in sediments collected along the Tamar pipeline
route ...................................................................................................................................... 35
11
Percent abundance of infaunal organisms (by taxonomic grouping) within the
Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey strata ................................................................................ 36
12
Mean (± standard deviation) number of taxonomic subgroups among survey
sampling strata ...................................................................................................................... 45
13
Mean (± standard deviation) number of individuals collected from survey sampling
strata...................................................................................................................................... 47
14
Locations of observations of biological activity along the remotely operated vehicle
(ROV) survey track around the Tamar 1 and Tamar 6 wellsites .......................................... 49
15
(ROV) survey track around the Tamar 2 wellsite ................................................................. 50
16
v
LIST OF FIGURES
(CONTINUED)
Figure
Page
17
18
vi
LIST OF IMAGES
Image
Page
1
Triton XLS work class remotely operated vehicle ................................................................. 6
2
ROV-mounted 10-L GO-FLO water sample bottles .............................................................. 7
3
Hydraulically activated box corer deployed with the remotely operated vehicle
manipulator arm ...................................................................................................................... 8
4
Macrobenthic infaunal sieving apparatus ............................................................................... 9
5
Smith-McIntyre grab sampling apparatus: sampling apparatus being lowered into
the position at Station A7 (left), and sampling port showing sample integrity with
overlying water after retrieval to deck (right). ........................................................................ 9
6
Specimen of the polychaetous annelids Notomastus sp. (left) and
Autolytinae sp. (right) ........................................................................................................... 37
7
Specimen of the bivalve mollusk Yoldiella sp ..................................................................... 39
8
Specimen of the crustacean Apseudopsis acutifrons ............................................................ 39
9
Specimen of the bivalve mollusk Bivalvia sp. ...................................................................... 40
10
Specimen of the polychaetous annelid Jasmineria sp. ........................................................ 42
11
Specimen of polychaetous annelid Prionospio sp. ............................................................... 42
12
The Tamar Field survey area was characterized by smooth and relatively flat soft
bottom substrate, as seen in this image collected near the Tamar 1 wellsite ........................ 48
13
Disturbed sediment near the Tamar 5 wellsite...................................................................... 48
14
Possible drill cuttings on the seafloor near the Tamar 1 wellsite.......................................... 48
15
A tripod fish (Bathypterois sp.) perched on its elongated tail and pelvic fin rays
observed during the video survey of the Tamar 4 wellsite ................................................... 54
16
A shrimp resting on the bottom of the seafloor during the video survey of the
Tamar 4 wellsite. .................................................................................................................. 54
17
An unidentified fish swimming toward the remotely operated vehicle during the
video survey of the Tamar 4 wellsite .................................................................................... 55
18
Apparent bioturbation such as this small group of burrows seen in the
Tamar 4 wellsite video survey area was commonly observed .............................................. 56
19
Conical mounds likely formed by deposit-feeding worms (Polychaeta) such as these
seen during the Tamar 4 wellsite video survey were common within the survey area......... 56
20
Mosaic of forward-looking sonar images (approximately 75-m radius) collected
while the remotely operated vehicle was oriented on headings of 0° and 180° at the
Tamar 3 wellsite ................................................................................................................... 57
vii
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Ac 228
ANOVA
BaSO4
Bi 214
CCC
actinium 228
analysis of variance
barium sulfate
bismuth 214
Criterion Continuous
Concentration
CO2
carbon dioxide
CoC
chain-of-custody
CSA
CTD
conductivity, temperature, and
depth
DGPS
differential global positioning
system
DO
dissolved oxygen
EDTA
ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid
ERL
Effects Range Low
ERM
Effects Range Median
GC-MS
gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry
HF
hydrofluoric acid
HNO3
nitric acid
ICP-AES
inductively coupled
plasma-atomic emission
spectrometry
ICP-MS
inductively coupled
plasma-mass spectrometry
MANOVA
multivariate analysis of variance
MDL
method detection limit
MEWR
Ministry of Energy and Water
Resources
Noble Energy Noble Energy Mediterranean
Ltd
NRWQC
NTU
MCL
MoEP
OSWER
PAH
ppb
ppm
QA
QC
Ra 226
Ra 228
Rn 222
ROV
SAP
SBE
SOW
TAMI
Th 228
TN
TOC
TP
TPH
TSS
USEPA
National Recommended Water
Quality Criteria
nephelometric turbidity unit
maximum contaminant level
Ministry of Environmental
Protection
Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbon
parts per billion
parts per million
quality assurance
quality control
radium 226
radium 228
radon 222
remotely operated vehicle
Sampling and Analysis Plan
Sea-Bird Electronics
Scope of Work
IMI TAMI Institute for
Research & Development Ltd.
thorium 228
total nitrogen
total organic carbon
total phosphorus
total petroleum hydrocarbons
total suspended solids
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
viii
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd (Noble Energy) has constructed a subsea gas production and
transportation system connecting the deepwater Tamar Gas Field (Tamar Field) to the Tamar Offshore
Receiving and Processing Platform (Tamar Platform). The components of the Tamar Development are
shown in Figure 1. The Tamar Field is located in License 309, Tamar Block, approximately 90 km west
of Haifa, within the Levantine Basin. The Tamar Gas Field was developed as a subsea tieback to the
Tamar Platform, which is located within 2 km of the existing Mari-B Platform. The Tamar and Mari-B
Platforms are located approximately 25 km off the coast of Israel in a water depth of approximately
230 m. The processed gas will be delivered from the Tamar Platform to the Ashdod Onshore Terminal
via hot tap into an existing 30-in. pipeline for gas sales into the Israel Natural Gas Line (INGL) system.
The Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MEWR) has required Noble Energy to develop and
conduct a survey to characterize the environment of the Tamar Field and pipeline route. Noble Energy
contracted CSA Ocean Sciences Inc. (CSA) to provide support for the project that included developing a
Scope of Work (SOW)/Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey
(Appendix A). The SOW/SAP described the parameters to be sampled, sampling methods, data
processing, laboratory methods, data analysis, and reporting. The SOW/SAP was accepted by the Israeli
Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP) prior to survey activities. The data collected during the
survey will also be useful for assessing impacts should an accidental event occur in the field or along the
pipeline route.
1.1
BACKGROUND
The Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey included the following survey components:
•
•
•
1.2
Collection of video data, including forward-looking sonar, in the Tamar Field to identify
characteristics of the seafloor substrates and associated fauna (epibenthos and fishes);
Seawater characterization, including collection of hydrographic profiles of water column
conductivity (salinity), temperature, fluorescence, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen (DO) as well
as collection of near-bottom water samples to document metals and hydrocarbon (alkanes and
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [PAHs]) concentrations in the Tamar Field; and
Collection of sediment and infaunal samples to document geological (grain size), chemical (total
organic carbon [TOC], metals, and hydrocarbons [alkanes and PAHs]), and biological attributes
at all stations in the Tamar Field and along the pipeline route.
PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this environmental survey was to characterize environmental conditions in the Tamar
Field and along the pipeline route leading from the field to the production platform and from the Tamar
Platform to the Ashdod Onshore Terminal. The characterization of environmental conditions consisted of
determining the spatial variation of selected environmental components (i.e., chemical, geological, and
biological) in sediments within the study area. Near-bottom water samples also were collected at all
Tamar Field stations and analyzed for a set of chemical analytes.
1
The objectives of the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey were to
•
•
document baseline conditions of the environment against which effects from future operations can be
compared; and
identify parameters within the ecosystem that may be sensitive to change and provide a reference
point to evaluate future claims of impacts.
The survey was conducted from 26 to 31 March 2013 and included collection of hydrographic profiling
data and water column samples from the Tamar Field and collection of sediment/infaunal samples at all
stations within the Tamar Field and at stations located along the pipeline.
3
2.0 SURVEY DESIGN
Sampling stations were located within two stratified random sampling designs, one corresponding to
environmental characterization of the Tamar Field and the other corresponding to environmental
characterization of the pipeline route. The sampling designs were selected to avoid potential
pseudo-replication (sensu Hurlbert, 1984) and provide representative samples for characterization of the
environment in the survey area.
For the Tamar Field, sampling was conducted in three geographic strata, with three sampling stations
randomly located within each of these strata (Figure 2). At Tamar Field stations, sampling consisted of
collection of seawater, sediment, infauna, and video. For the pipeline route, sampling was divided among
five strata defined by water depth (Table 1); station locations were randomly located within each stratum,
and only sediment and infaunal samples were collected. The sampling effort is summarized in Table 1
and shown in Figure 2. A total of 30 stations was sampled.
Table 1. Summary of sampling conducted for the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey.
Depth Stratum
Description
Sample Type
20 – 200 m
200 – 300 m
300 – 900 m
900 – 1,400 m
1,400 – 1,700 m
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Between the Tamar Platform and Ashdod Onshore Terminal
Between the Tamar Platform and 300-m isobath
Between the 300- and 900-m isobaths
Between the 900- and 1,400-m isobaths
Between the 1,400-m isobath and the manifold in the Tamar Field
Sediment/infauna
Sediment/infauna
Sediment/infauna
Sediment/infauna
Sediment/infauna
Seawater/sediment/
infauna
3 strata x 3 stations
Number of
Sampling
Stations
7
4
4
3
3
9
Seawater samples were collected and hydrographic profiles were conducted in the Tamar Field. The
water column was profiled for conductivity (salinity), temperature, DO, fluorescence, and turbidity.
Seawater samples were collected near-bottom at each Tamar Field station and analyzed for total
suspended solids (TSS), total organic carbon (TOC), nutrients (total nitrogen [TN] and total phosphorus
[TP]), total metals, hydrocarbons (alkanes, total petroleum hydrocarbons [TPH], and PAHs), and
radionuclides (radium [Ra] 226 and Ra 228).
Seafloor sediment samples were collected at all 30 sampling stations. These samples were
analyzed for grain size distribution, TOC, total metals, hydrocarbons (alkanes, TPH, and PAHs),
radionuclides (Ra 226, Ra 228, and thorium [Th] 228), and infauna.
4
3.0 FIELD METHODS
3.1
VESSEL OPERATION, NAVIGATION, AND REQUIRED PERSONNEL
The survey vessel and navigational equipment were provided by Noble Energy. The M/V EDT ARES,
owned and operated by EDT Shipping Company Ltd., was under contract to Noble Energy and used for
the field survey operations. Vessel specifications are provided in Appendix B. The survey vessel was
mobilized with personnel and equipment at the Haifa shorebase in Israel.
Dynamic positioning was used to maintain the vessel on station. WinFrog, a computer software and
hardware system, was used to interface various data sources with a differential global positioning system
(DGPS) receiver. Prior to the survey, all survey sampling locations (i.e., video transects and
seawater/sediment collection stations) were pre-plotted and submitted to the navigator for entry into the
navigation software. The DGPS and vessel fathometer were connected to an on-board computer equipped
with navigation and data acquisition software. An ultra-short baseline transponder was attached to a
remotely operated vehicle (ROV) to record its position, using DGPS, relative to the vessel position. The
positions of the ROV track and sample collection locations were recorded and stored by the navigation
software.
Field sampling operations were conducted on a 24-hour-per-day basis. CSA provided six survey
personnel (three scientists and three operational technicians) to conduct in-country mobilization of survey
equipment and supplies, outfit the ROV for conducting seawater and sediment sampling, program
hydrographic instrumentation, and process collected samples. The CSA Chief Scientist was responsible
for preparing sampling equipment and storage containers, directing data collection, overseeing all aspects
of sample processing, and coordinating shipment or delivery of samples to respective laboratories.
3.2
REMOTELY OPERATED VEHICLE
A Triton XLS, a heavy duty, 150-hp work class ROV system
manufactured by Perry Slingsby Systems and rated to 3,000 m,
was used for data and sample collection during the Tamar Field
and Pipeline Survey (Image 1).
The ROV system was installed on the M/V EDT ARES and
included an A-frame and winch with a 3,300-m steel armored
umbilical and ROV control center. The computer control system
provided auto heading, attitude, depth, pitch, and roll control.
Video collection capability was provided by one Kongsberg
OE1366 standard definition color zoom camera and one
Kongsberg OE15-100A Enhanced CCD low light camera mounted
on hydraulic pan-and-tilt units with multiple 250-watt lamps. The
hydraulic propulsion system consisted of four 15-in. horizontal
thrusters and four 12-in. vertical thrusters. Solid syntactic flotation
blocks provided neutral trim and a maximum payload capacity of
300 kg. One seven-function manipulator and one five-function
manipulator were mounted on the front of the ROV.
Image 1. Triton XLS work class
remotely operated vehicle.
6
A Sea-Bird Electronics (SBE) SBE-19 conductivity-temperature-depth (CTD)/water quality profiler was
mounted on the upper front of the ROV above the manipulators and integrated with the ROV
instrumentation junction box to provide real-time surface monitoring. GO-FLO water sample bottles
(10 L) were mounted across the back of the ROV and hydraulically triggered using the ROV’s auxiliary
tooling manifold. The box cores were carried in an aluminum frame bracket attached to the port side,
forward tray of the ROV and operated using the ROV’s auxiliary tooling manifold.
3.3
WATER COLUMN SAMPLING
Water column sampling was conducted to evaluate chemical and physical parameters. Hydrographic
data, including conductivity (salinity), temperature, DO, fluorescence, and turbidity, were collected
throughout the water column with an SBE-19plus V2
CTD/water quality profiler. Seawater samples were collected
near-bottom (<5 m) at all stations located within the Tamar
Field survey area.
Water column sampling was conducted to provide seawater
for the analysis of TSS, TOC, nutrients (TN and TP), total
metals, hydrocarbons (alkanes, TPH, and PAHs), and
radionuclides (Ra 226 and Ra 228). Seawater samples were
collected with clean 10-L GO-FLO water sample bottles
mounted on the ROV (Image 2) that were tripped using a
pneumatic switch.
Image 2. ROV-mounted 10-L GO-FLO
water sample bottles.
A seawater sample (≤4 L) was collected to analyze each
specified parameter. All samples were placed in precleaned (as appropriate for specified parameters)
labeled sample containers. Seawater sampling and handling protocols are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Processing and storage requirements for seawater samples collected for analysis.
Parameter/Analyte(s)
Total suspended solids
Nutrients (total organic carbon, total
nitrogen, total phosphorous)
Metals other than mercury
Mercury
Container Type and
Size
Handling, Storage Conditions,
and/or Preservation Method
Holding
Time
1-L filtered
Freeze; ship on ice
Indefinite
250-mL plastic bottle
Freeze; ship on ice
Indefinite
1-L narrow-mouth
plastic
500-mL narrow-mouth
fluorinated plastic
Nitric acid (HNO3) to pH <2;
6 months
cool to 4°C; ship on ice
HNO3 to pH <2; cool to 4°C;
28 days
ship on ice
1L
1-L amber glass bottle
Cool to 4°C; ship on ice
4L
4-L plastic bottle
HNO3 to pH <2
250 mL
1L
500 mL
Hydrocarbons (alkanes, total petroleum
hydrocarbons, and polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons)
Radionuclides (radium 226 and radium 228)
3.4
Minimum
Sample
Volume
1L
7 days
Indefinite
SEDIMENT AND INFAUNAL SAMPLING
Sediment and infaunal samples were collected with three hydraulically activated box corers that were
deployed with the ROV. Each box corer had a surface area of 0.0625 m2. The ROV manipulator arm
was used to deploy the grabs and collect the sediment and infaunal samples (Image 3).
7
Image 3. Hydraulically activated box corer deployed with the remotely operated vehicle manipulator arm. The box
corer was placed over a clean patch of sediment (left) and pushed into the sediment until a sufficient
volume of sample was retrieved (right).
Sediment was collected from one of the three ROV box corers for chemical and physical analyses. The
top 2 to 3 cm of the sediment core was subsampled for sediment physio-chemical analyses including grain
size distribution, TOC, metals, and hydrocarbons (alkanes and PAHs). Analyses were conducted to
determine the concentrations of various U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) priority
pollutant and hydrocarbon-associated metals including antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium,
chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc. Sediments were
also analyzed for aluminum and iron. These metals occur naturally within the environment and can be
used as reference metals to detect unnatural concentrations of hydrocarbon-associated metals through
correlation. Sediment samples were transferred into precleaned sample containers, frozen, and
handled/stored as recommended by USEPA protocols. Sediment sampling protocols are summarized in
Table 3.
Table 3. Processing and storage requirements for sediment sampling parameters.
Storage Conditions
and/or Preservation
Method
Minimum
Sample Weight
Container Type
and Size
200 g (wet)
250-mL wide-mouth
plastic jar
Freeze, ship on ice, and Indefinite when
store frozen
frozen
Metals
150 g
250-mL wide-mouth
plastic jar
Freeze, ship on ice, and Indefinite when
store frozen
frozen
Hydrocarbons (alkanes and
polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons)
150 g
125-mL wide-mouth
glass jar
Freeze, ship on ice, and
store frozen
Grain size distribution;
total organic carbon
Holding Time
28 d
Two ROV box corers were used to collect replicate infaunal samples at each station. The entire contents
of each corer were collected and processed for infauna. Samples were wet-sieved through a 0.25-mm
mesh sieve with a technique that minimizes trauma to infaunal organisms and facilitates resuspension of
sediment (including clay fractions) and separation of infaunal organisms from the sediment. The
apparatus consisted of a sample mixing barrel fitted with a spillover drain and was positioned above a
large spillover barrel. A 12-in. diameter stainless steel 0.25-mm sieve was mounted between the spillover
8
drain and over the lower spillover barrel (Image 4). The flow rate from the mixing barrel was monitored
to prevent overloading on the sieve screen. The sieved sample (containing infaunal organisms, residual
sediment, and debris) was consolidated and transferred to a labelled sample container and preserved with
an 8% borax-buffered formalin solution.
Image 4. Macrobenthic infaunal sieving apparatus. The apparatus consists of an upper mixing barrel and sieve
table over a lower spillover barrel.
The sediment and infaunal sample collected at Station A7 (Figure 2) was collected with a
Smith-McIntyre grab sampler (Image 5). It was necessary to sample Station A7 with a different sampling
apparatus because the ROV box corer was not able to penetrate the dense, coarse sediment at this station.
Sample size was approximate to that of the ROV box corer, and the methods for sediment and infaunal
collection were identical to those described above.
Image 5. Smith-McIntyre grab sampling apparatus: sampling apparatus being lowered into the position at
Station A7 (left), and sampling port showing sample integrity with overlying water after retrieval to deck
(right).
9
3.5
VIDEOGRAPHY AND SONAR
Videography and sonar-based data provide visually based monitoring focused on seafloor features in
close proximity to the Tamar Field wellsites. Underwater video and forward-looking sonar data were
collected along 200-m video transects radiating out from each wellsite at 45˚ intervals (eight transects).
The tracks followed by the ROV along designated transects and at the sampling stations were recorded
with the ROV’s on-board navigation system.
Underwater videographic data were collected with a video camera mounted on the Triton XLS ROV
system. The ROV-mounted camera was aimed slightly above vertical to provide a field of view that
included the bottom substrate in front of the system. The ROV was maneuvered at relatively slow speeds
close to the seafloor to ensure the collection of videographic data that best met survey objectives. Along
each transect, video observations were recorded continuously to provide information to determine the
spatial extent of topographic features relative to the wellsite. Additionally, the videographic data were
used to determine presence/absence and relative abundance estimates for epifauna and demersal fishes
within the survey area. Bottom features and faunal observations were digitally marked using VisualSoft
software to facilitate expeditious video data analysis. Forward-looking sonar acoustic data were collected
at ROV positions to provide information to confirm visual observations about local topographic features.
3.6
QUALITY CONTROL
Quality control (QC) measures were implemented in the field to collect representative samples, allow
assessment for potential sources of contamination, minimize data and sample loss, and ensure collection
of requisite samples and data. Field QC measures included preparation of sample checklists, collection,
and preparation of equipment blanks (rinsates) and splits, completion of checklists, and data checks.
QC measures were implemented to meet requirements including the use of qualified/certified equipment,
personnel, and laboratories; chain-of-custody (CoC) processes; collection of QC samples (blanks and
splits) representing at least 10% of the total number of samples; and detailed documentation of sample
and data analysis steps and results.
Cleaning Procedures
To ensure that samples represent natural conditions, sample collection equipment must not cause
contamination of the samples and sampling methods must not cause unacceptable changes in samples
collected (sampling artifacts). Water samplers, sediment samplers, and sample processing equipment
were thoroughly cleaned according to accepted procedures prior to use in the field. Precleaned sample
containers were processed by the distributor following appropriate USEPA protocols as specified in the
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9240.0-05A “Specifications and
Guidance for Contaminant-Free Sample Containers.” All samples were collected with precleaned sample
containers.
3.6.1
Quality Control Measures
Equipment Blanks
After the sampling equipment was cleaned, an equipment blank was prepared by pouring deionized water
through the equipment and collecting the deionized water rinsate in a precleaned and labeled 1-L sample
container bottle, which was then shipped to the laboratory in the same fashion as the other samples.
Field Blanks
Field blanks were prepared by pouring analyte-free deionized water into clean sample containers while in
the field. Field blanks were then shipped to the laboratory in the same fashion as the other samples.
10
Sample Duplicates
QC included duplicate samples for both water and sediment chemistry parameters. Duplicate samples
were collected from the same sediment grab sample or Niskin bottle and sent to both the primary
analytical laboratory in the U.S. (TDI Brooks [College Station, Texas]) and an Israeli (IMI TAMI
Institute for Research & Development Ltd. [TAMI]) and U.S. analytical laboratory (ALS Environmental
[Kelso, Washington]) for interlaboratory comparison.
Sea-Bird Profiler Data Check
During or soon after a water column profile cast was completed, the SBE hydrographic data were
downloaded and plotted in the field to check that the collected data were within expected ranges for the
conditions at the survey area, the equipment was functioning normally, and the configuration and data
files were in good order.
Sample Preservation, Storage, and Holding Times
Samples were preserved as specified by applicable regulations or industry practice and transported to the
laboratories for analysis within the prescribed sample holding times under appropriate preservation and
handling conditions.
Data and Sample Collection Checklists
Prior to the survey, data and sample checklists were prepared by the Chief Scientist and completed in the
field as appropriate for QC. Prior to departing each sampling station, the Chief Scientist or his designee
reviewed the checklist and physically examined and confirmed data files, logbooks, and sample
containers to ensure that the data and required samples were properly collected, preserved, and stored.
3.6.2
Sample Handling and Transport
After sample collection, proper sample handling protocols were followed to ensure valid results were
obtained from the analysis of each sample. To ensure proper handling, all stages of sample collection,
storage, and handling were documented in a field logbook. Pertinent information concerning field
activities and sampling were recorded in the logbook by the Chief and/or Field Scientist.
All samples were transported or shipped under a CoC process. Proper CoC was maintained for all
samples, and a CoC record accompanied all samples. Personnel involved with the custody of the
sample(s) signed the appropriate forms and ensured that the samples were properly handled, stored, and
transported to the analytical laboratory. Sample shipping containers were secured to be leakproof, avoid
cross-contamination, and prevent sample loss during shipment.
Sample analysis requests and instructions were prepared to accompany or be sent separately for all
samples shipped to the laboratories. The project team confirmed that all samples were delivered and
logged in at each designated laboratory. Samples were shipped to the appropriate laboratory for analysis
as soon as possible after collection. Transport and shipping were coordinated to ensure compliance with
sample holding times.
3.6.3
Document and Data Security
All data collected during field operations (e.g., navigation and positioning, CTD, still and video imagery
in digital format, acoustic, etc.) are duplicated and stored on two hard drives (typically, primary laptop
and additionally at least one external hard drive). This storage occurs as soon as possible after collection
but typically within the same watch or day, depending on the field deployment. Either the Chief Scientist
11
or Operations Lead ensures that a back-up external drive is included in the project mobilization. While on
site, backup media are stored separately from the field computer. During return from the field, the field
computer and backup media are transported separately whenever feasible, but at least one copy travels in
personal possession. Either the Chief Scientist or the Operations Lead ensures that the data drives are
delivered to CSA’s Stuart, Florida office. Field notebooks and datasheets are then copied and scanned
into a file associated with the job and together with other data are backed up on the data server. The link
to these data is shared with the Project Manager to ensure redundant knowledge for future access. The
Chief Scientist verifies that the data are put into CSA’s enterprise-class storage system. CSA maintains
two copies of the data—one live working copy and one copy on archival tape for disaster recovery
purposes. All original raw data will be stored by CSA for at least 5 years after the completion of the
contract, at which time CSA will contact the client or its representative to determine whether the data
should be returned to the client. Upon request, copies of the raw data will be provided to the client or
subject to audit by designated client representatives.
12
4.0 DATA PROCESSING AND LABORATORY METHODS
4.1
HYDROGRAPHIC PROFILES
Digital data files from the SBE19plus V2 CTD profiler were processed using SBE data processing
software, a proprietary modular family of data processing software specific to SBE oceanographic
instruments. The SBE data processing modules were used, as appropriate, to convert the raw data to a
text file, extract the desired sections for specific stations, smooth the data, and import the file into a
spreadsheet prior to plotting. Further processing prepared the data as diagrammatic vertical hydrographic
profiles with SigmaPlot and tabular spreadsheet summaries presented in this report.
4.2
SEAWATER AND SEDIMENT ANALYSIS
TAMI (Haifa, Israel) performed the analysis of sediment metals, excluding mercury. The Geological
Survey of Israel (GSI; Jerusalem, Israel) performed analysis of seawater metals and sediment mercury.
TDI Brooks (College Station, Texas, U.S.) performed the analysis of seawater and sediment hydrocarbon
samples. Weatherford Laboratories (Shenandoah, Texas, U.S.) performed the analysis of sediment grain
size and TOC. Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL; Solomons, Maryland, U.S) performed the
analysis of seawater nutrients. ALS Limited (Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.) performed the analysis of
sediment and seawater radionuclides. Tables 4 and 5 outline the analytical parameters, analysis methods,
reporting units, and reporting limits of seawater and sediment samples, respectively. Quality assurance
(QA) analyses were conducted by ALS Environmental (Kelso, Washington, U.S.), TDI Brooks, and
TAMI, research and contract laboratories with extensive experience in the analysis of metals and
hydrocarbons in seawater and marine sediments.
Table 4. Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, and reporting limits of quantification
for seawater samples.
Parameter/
Analyte
Digestion/
Extraction
Method
Arsenic
Antimony
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mercury
N/A
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mediterranean
Seawater
Quality
StandardsP
Mean Max.
Primary
Analytical
Laboratory
Analytical/Detection/
Quantification Method
Limit of
Quantification1
CCC2
Geological
Survey of
Israel
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
Based on
USEPA 1631E
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
ICP-MS
7
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.1
5
1
0.1
36
500p
200
-8.8
--3
3.1
8.1
36
---0.5
10
5
5
69
---2
20
10
20
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
0.01
0.94
0.16
0.4
µg L-1
0.1
7
0.5
0.1
2
2
8.2
71
--50
81
10
60
3
-50
40
50
150
7
-100
100
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
µg L-1
Units
13
Table 4. (Continued).
Parameter/
Analyte
Digestion/
Extraction
Method
Alkanes
Hexane
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
Hexane
PAHs
Hexane
Total nitrogen
Total phosphorus
Primary
Analytical
Laboratory
USEPA
1664/8100/8015
GC-MS
TDI Brooks
USEPA SW-846
Modified 8100/8015C
USEPA SW-846/8260
TDI Brooks
GC-MS
diazo colorimetric
method
Chesapeake
ascorbic acid
Biological
colorimetric method
Laboratory
High-temperature
combustion
USEPA Method 903.1
ALS Limited USEPA Method 904.0
and SW-846 9320
Persulfate
digestion
Persulfate
digestion
Total organic
carbon
Radium 226
N/A
Radium 228
N/A
N/A
Mediterranean
Seawater
Quality
StandardsP
Mean Max.
Limit of
Quantification1
CCC2
0.069 – 0.277
--
--
--
µg L-1
13
--
--
--
µg L-1
0.74 – 2.91
--
--
--
ng L-1
0.01
--
1.0
mg/L
0.0013
--
0.1
mg/L
0.24
--
--
mg/L
1
--
--
--
pCi L-1
1
--
--
--
pCi L-1
Units
CCC = Criterion Continuous Concentration; GC-MS = gas chromatography-mass spectrometry; ICP-MS = inductively coupled plasma-mass
spectrometry; N/A = Not applicable; PAHs = polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; USEPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
1
Limits of quantification are the detection limits for metals and reporting limit for alkanes and PAHs.
2
CCC is an estimate of the highest concentration of a material in ambient water to which an aquatic community can be exposed indefinitely
without resulting in unacceptable adverse effect.
3
Chromium III = 27.4 µg L-1; Chromium VI = 50 µg L-1.
p
= proposed.
Table 5. Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, and reporting limits of quantification
for sediment samples.
Parameter/
Analyte
Grain size
distribution
Total organic
carbon
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Digestion/
Extraction
Method
Analytical Laboratory
N/A
Weatherford Laboratories
N/A
1
HF
HF1
HF1
HF1
HF1
HF1
HF1
HF1
Iron
Lead
HF1
HF1
Mercury
HF1
Research & Development
Ltd.
Geological Survey of
Israel
Analytical/Detection/ Quantification
Limit
Laser diffraction
particle size analysis
Based on European
Standard Norm 1484
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on
USEPA 1631E
ERL
ERM
Units
0.1
--
--
μm
5
--
--
ppm
2
1
3
0.5
1
0.5
1
1
-2
8.2
--1.2
81
34
-25
70
--9.6
370
270
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
1
5
-46.7
-218
%
ppm
0.02
0.15
0.71
ppm
14
Parameter/
Analyte
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Digestion/
Extraction
Method
HF1
HF1
HF1
1
HF
HF1
HF1
Alkanes
Hexane
Total
petroleum
hydrocarbons
Hexane
PAHs
Hexane
Radium 226
Radium 228
Thorium 228
Research & Development
Ltd.
N/A
N/A
N/A
TDI Brooks
ALS Limited
Analytical/Detection/ Quantification
Limit
ERL
ERM
Units
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
1
1
1
20.9
-1
51.6
-3.7
ppm
ppm
ppm
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
Based on ISO 11885
USEPA
1664/8100/8015/GCMS
1
1
1
--150
--410
ppm
ppm
ppm
0.004 – 0.019
--
--
µg g-1
1.4
--
--
µg g-1
USEPA/SW-846
Modified 8100/8015C
USEPA SW5522
3,1602
0.342 – 0.041
ng g-1
846/8260/GC-MS
4,0023 44,7923
USEPA Method 901.1
1
--pCi g-1
USEPA Method 901.1
1
--pCi g-1
USEPA, EMSL/LV
0.2
--pCi g-1
EMSL/LV = Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas; ERL = Effects Range Low; ERM = Effects Range Median;
GC-MS = gas chromatography-mass spectrometry; HF = hydrofluoric acid; ISO = International Organization for Standardization; N/A = not
applicable; PAHs = polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; USEPA = U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
1
The HF digestion procedure results in the release of nearly all the metal content of a sample and is believed to be a more accurate estimate of the
metal concentrations in all sample matrices.
2
Low molecular weight PAHs.
3
Total PAHs.
4.2.1
Seawater
Total Suspended Solids
Acceptable methods for the laboratory determination of TSS include USEPA Method 160.2 and Standard
Methods 2540D. TSS concentrations in seawater samples were determined by pouring a known volume
of seawater (~1 L) through a preweighed glass fiber filter of a specified pore size and then weighing the
filter again to 0.001 mg after rinsing the filter with deionized water to remove salts and drying in an oven
to remove residual water.
Total Organic Carbon
TOC concentrations in seawater were determined in a Shimadzu TOC-5000 analyzer using a high
temperature combustion method. Samples were treated with hydrochloric acid and sparged with ultrapure
carrier-grade air to drive off inorganic carbon. High temperature combustion (680°C) on a catalyst bed of
platinum-coated alumina balls breaks down organic carbon into carbon dioxide (CO2). The CO2 was
carried by ultra-pure air to a nondispersive infrared detector, where CO2 was detected and quantified.
Nutrients
Seawater nutrient analysis included TN and TP concentrations determined through colorimetric methods
in a segmented flow analyzer. TN concentrations were determined by the diazo-colorimetric method after
alkaline persulfate digestion. TP concentrations were determined by the molybdo-phosphoric blue
colorimetric method after alkaline persulfate digestion.
15
Total Metals
Total metals (i.e., metals in unfiltered samples) were analyzed principally by inductively coupled
plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) methods. The analysis was by flow injection ICP-MS using an
Elan DRC-e Perkin-Elmer without dilution of samples. Analysis of mercury was by atomic fluorescence
spectroscopy with a PS Analytical Millennium System.
ALS Environmental’s methods for analysis of metals in seawater involved reductive precipitation
methods to achieve lower detection limits in a high salt matrix. The seawater samples were treated with
iron and palladium carriers, pH adjusted, and then subjected to reducing conditions using sodium
tetrahydridoborate (sodium borohydride) then analyzed by ICP-MS. Barium was analyzed by inductively
coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES). Antimony was determined in a 1:20 dilution
of seawater in a sample and analyzed by ICP-MS. Selenium in seawater was determined by borohydride
reduction and atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Seawater samples analyzed for mercury were
prepared for analysis by the addition of bromine monochloride solution and analyzed with a Brooks Rand
Model III cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectrometer.
Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbon components in seawater were analyzed using solvent extraction and gas chromatographic
techniques. Analytical methods for hydrocarbons were similar for the primary analytical and
QA laboratories. The analytical method for alkanes was USEPA Method 1664 (solvent extraction; gas
chromatography-mass spectrometry [GC-MS]). The analytical method for TPH was USEPA/SW-846
Modified 8100/8015C. Analytical methods for PAHs include USEPA SW-846/8260 or 8270 or
equivalent using an Agilent Model 6890/5973 gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer.
Radionuclides
The Ra 226 in aqueous samples is concentrated and separated by co-precipitation with barium sulfate
(BaSO4). Prior to separation, a portion of the sample is removed for ICP-AES determination of the
preparation concentration of barium in the sample. The Ba[Ra]SO4 precipitate is dissolved in basic
ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) solution, placed in a 40-mL volatile organic analysis vial, purged
of any existing radon 222 (Rn 222), and stored to allow quantitative in-growth of Rn 222. After
in-growth, the radon is purged into an alpha scintillation cell. The short-lived Rn 222 progeny are
allowed to come to equilibrium with the parent radon (~4 hours) before the scintillation cell is counted for
alpha activity. The 4-hour in-growth period also allows for the decay of other radon isotopes.
The radon isotopes in a water sample are collected by co-precipitation of barium and lead sulfate and
purified by re-precipitation out of a basic EDTA solution. This technique is devised so that the beta
activity from actinium 228 (Ac 228), which is produced by decay of Ra 228, can be determined and
related to the activity concentration of Ra 228 present in the sample. After a 36-hour period to allow for
the in-growth of Ac 228, lead is removed as lead (II) sulfide, and actinium is carried on yttrium as the
hydroxide and mounted as the oxalate, and quickly beta-counted on a gas flow proportional counter to
minimize decay of the short-lived Ac 228 (~6 hours).
4.2.2
Sediment
Grain Size
Sediment grain size was determined by means of laser (diffraction) particle size analysis using a
Malvern 2000 Mastersizer. Particle sizes were computed automatically within the instrument using the
Mie Model for light scattering and reported as percent distribution according to size classes representing
sand, silt, and clay-sized particles.
16
Ground sediments were accurately weighed and then treated with concentrated hydrochloric acid to
remove carbonates. The samples were left in acid for a minimum of 2 hours. The acid was removed from
the sample with a filtration apparatus fitted with a glass microfiber filter. The filter was placed in a
LECO crucible and dried at 110° C for a minimum of 1 hour. After drying, the sample was analyzed with
a LECO 600 carbon analyzer.
Total Metals
Analyses were conducted to determine the concentrations of various metals including aluminum,
antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, iron, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium,
silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc. Analysis for all sediment metals except mercury was conducted by
acid digestion and with Varian Vista AX inductively coupled plasma-atomic absorption spectrometer and
calibrated against prepared standard solutions. Mercury analysis of sediments was conducted using cold
vapor atomic absorption spectroscopy and calibrated against prepared standard solutions. The sediment
subsample was digested in nitric acid, hydrogen peroxide, and hydrofluoric acid with the release of
elemental mercury by the addition of stannous chloride.
Hydrocarbons
Hydrocarbon components in sediments were analyzed by solvent extraction and gas chromatographic
techniques. The analytical methods for hydrocarbons included USEPA Method 1664/8100/8015
(solvent extraction; GC-MS) for alkanes, USEPA/SW-846 Modified 8100/8015C for TPH, and
USEPA SW-846/8260 or 8270 using an Agilent Model 6890/5973 gas chromatograph-mass spectrometer
and calibrated against prepared standard solutions for PAHs.
Radionuclides
For Ra 226, the method involved drying and sieving the sample, sealing the sample in a steel can, and
allowing 21 days for the in-growth of the Pb 214 and bismuth 214 (Bi 214) progeny. The analysis
entailed quantification of the Pb 214 and Bi 214 progeny, assuming secular equilibrium, and reporting the
abundance weighted mean of the lead and bismuth activities as Ra 226. Assuming secular equilibrium,
the gamma emissions from Ac 228, which is produced by decay of Ra 228, are determined and related to
the activity concentration of Ra 228 present in the sample. Gamma emissions from radionuclides were
detected by a semiconductor germanium crystal, which provided a small electronic pulse for each gamma
interaction where the pulse height was proportional to the gamma incident energy. These electronic data
were converted to digital data by an analog-to-digital converter and stored in a multichannel buffer. The
data collected by the multichannel buffer were subsequently interpreted by a complex software program,
generating results in units of radioactivity per unit sample volume.
Thorium samples were dried and ground to a fine particle size. In cases where there is high organic
matter, the samples are placed in a muffle furnace so that any organic matter is removed by combustion.
Tracers were added and dissolution was accomplished using nitric, hydrochloric, and hydrofluoric acids.
When actinides were being determined, a hydroxide co-precipitation was performed to pre-concentrate
actinides and remove constituents that did not form insoluble hydroxides. The hydroxide precipitate was
then re-dissolved, and further purification was performed through various chromatography resins. The
purified thorium was co-precipitated with lanthanum fluoride and mounted on a filter membrane for
quantification by alpha spectroscopy.
17
4.3
INFAUNA
Samples were transported to EcoAnalysts, Inc. (Moscow, Idaho. U.S.) for sorting and taxonomic
identification. Each infaunal sample was transferred from formalin to ethyl alcohol prior to sorting.
Samples were sorted to major taxonomic groups and then distributed to taxonomists for species
identification and enumeration. During the taxonomic process, organisms were identified to the lowest
practical taxonomic level by EcoAnalysts, Inc. in-house taxonomists. Nematodes were not identified, and
oligochaetes and ostracods were only enumerated. Data were recorded on electronic datasheets within the
EcoAnalysts, Inc. laboratory information management system and then later output in a Microsoft Excel
format.
A variety of statistical routines were applied to the resulting datasets using PRIMER v.6 (Clarke and
Gorley, 2006) software, which was used to calculate several univariate community structure indices,
including Shannon's H′ (base 2), Pielou’s evenness value (J′), and Fisher’s log-series alpha 1.
4.4
VIDEOGRAPHY AND SONAR
Video data were reviewed to generally characterize the seafloor substrate and associated biological
community (i.e., epibiota and demersal fishes). The presence/absence and relative abundance estimates
for epifauna and demersal fishes were used to characterize the biological community.
Forward-looking sonar acoustic data collected along the ROV transects provided additional information
specific to the localized seafloor topography within the survey area. Representative sonar images were
processed to present the acoustic signatures of seafloor topographic features.
1
Fisher's log-series model of species abundance (Fisher et al., 1943) has been widely used, particularly by entomologists and
botanists (Magurran, 1988) and more recently for deep-sea benthic data analysis. Taylor's (1978) studies of the properties of
this index found that it was the best index for discriminating among subtly different sites.
18
5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey was conducted by CSA personnel from 26 to 31 March 2013 from
the M/V EDT ARES. The following subsections present the results of the Tamar Field and Pipeline
Survey.
5.1
SEA STATE
Weather conditions during survey operations were variable. Sea state varied from calm to 2 m from the
west-northwest. Wind direction was also variable, with wind speed ranging from calm to 15 knots.
5.2
HYDROGRAPHIC DATA
0
0
200
200
400
400
600
600
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
Hydrographic profiles of the water column collected on 26 March 2013 at Station TF7 in a water depth of
approximately 1,680 m are shown in Figure 3. The hydrographic profiles are considered representative
of the water column in the survey area.
800
1000
800
1000
1200
1200
1400
1400
1600
1600
1800
1800
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
-2
0
Temperature (°C)
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)
37.0
37.5
38.0
38.5
Salinity
39.0
2
4
6
8
10
0.8
1.0
Fluorescence (mg/m3)
0.2
0.4
0.6
Turbidity (NTU)
39.5
40.0
0
20
40
60
80
100
Dissolved Oxygen (% Saturation)
Figure 3. Hydrographic profiles of the water column collected at Station TF7 on 26 March 2013:
temperature, dissolved oxygen (mg L-1), and salinity (left), and fluorescence, turbidity, and
dissolved oxygen (% saturation) (right).
Surface waters were cool and isothermal (17°C), then water temperatures decreased through the
thermocline and stabilized to 14°C through the remainder of the water column to the seafloor. Salinity
varied between 38.7 and 39.1 through the halocline (salinity gradient) and gradually stabilized with
increasing water depth to 38.7 at the seafloor. Turbidity was low (0.10 to 0.15 nephelometric turbidity
units [NTU]) throughout the water column. Photosynthetic activity, which can be used to estimate
primary productivity within the water column, was measured with a fluorometer. The photosynthetic
maximum occurred at water depths between 50 and 95 m, primarily due to an optimal combination of
nutrient and light availability at those depths that promotes phytoplankton growth. Above this layer,
19
nutrient availability for phytoplankton growth is generally limiting, while below this layer a reduction in
light penetration inhibits phytoplankton growth.
The water column was well oxygenated at the surface (7.4 mg L-1) and through the surface-mixed layer
before stabilizing to ~5.7 mg L-1 above the seafloor. The near-surface depression of DO may be
attributed to the actinic effects of sunlight decreasing photosynthesis. The DO stabilization at water
depths below 400 m is typical of the Levantine Basin because the amount of organic material sinking
from the surface waters is low, which limits microbial respiration at depth (Krom, 1995).
5.3
SEAWATER AND SEDIMENT ANALYSIS
Seawater samples were collected near-bottom from all Tamar Field stations (Figure 4) and analyzed for
TSS, nutrients, total metals, hydrocarbons, and radionuclides. Sediment samples (Figure 5) were
collected from all stations located in Tamar Field and along the pipeline. These samples were analyzed to
determine grain size and concentrations of TOC, total metals, hydrocarbons, and radionuclides.
5.3.1
Seawater
Total Suspended Solids
TSS concentrations appear to be slightly elevated throughout the survey area (Table 6) relative to
concentrations that may be expected in the open ocean environment of the eastern Mediterranean and
based on direct observations concerning water clarity. The water clarity throughout the water column was
very good based on direct video observations, with no visible suspended solids outside the immediate
range of the ROV. TSS concentrations averaged 13.4 ± 22.0 mg L-1 for the Tamar Field (Table 6). The
high TSS concentration at Station TF1 (72.0 mg L-1) is likely due to the resuspension of sediments near
the seafloor due to ROV operations. TSS concentrations at all stations were higher than the reported
concentrations for northeastern Mediterranean surface waters, which ranged from 0.6 to 1.7 mg L-1
(Yilmaz et al., 1998).
Nutrients
TN and TP concentrations in seawater samples were low and nearly uniform throughout the water column
and survey area (Table 7). The eastern Levantine Basin has extremely low levels of nutrients, and the
region is considered “ultra-oligotrophic.” Nitrate and phosphate concentrations in surface waters in the
eastern Mediterranean are one-half their concentrations in the western basin (Bethoux et al., 1992). This
severe nutrient deficit is due to the very low net supply of nutrients to the Mediterranean Basin because
the Atlantic inflow brings in nutrient-depleted surface waters and there is very little nutrient input from
rivers in the eastern Levantine Basin (Krom, 1995).
Total Metals
Results of the analysis of total metals in seawater are provided in Table 8 along with mean concentrations
observed during previous Levantine Basin baseline surveys, Mediterranean Sea water quality standards,
and toxicity reference values (marine Criterion Continuous Concentrations [CCCs] from Buchman,
2008). Analytical results for seawater total metals concentrations are found in Appendix C. Where
USEPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria (NRWQC) (Buchman, 2008) are not available for
some metals, criteria from other countries (e.g., Canada, New Zealand) are provided for reference.
Concentrations of antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel,
selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc were not detected by the primary laboratory. All seawater
total metals concentrations in the Tamar Field samples were below the mean and maximum
Mediterranean Sea water quality standards and below potentially harmful levels, as defined by CCC
values. The recorded barium concentrations in the survey area water column were at ambient levels.
20
Table 6. Station concentrations (mg L-1) and mean concentrations (± standard deviation [SD]) of total
suspended solids (TSS) in seawater samples collected near the seafloor in the Tamar Field.
Mean (± SD) Levantine Basin baseline survey data and the proposed Mediterranean Sea water
quality standards in Israel are provided for comparison (MoEP, 2002).
TF1
TF2
TF3
TF4
TF5
TSS
(mg L-1)
72.0
7.8
7.2
7.4
5.6
TF6
TF7
TF8
TF9
Tamar Field mean*
Levantine Basin baseline data
4.3
4.9
6.1
5.6
6.1 ± 1.3
8.7 ± 6.4
Proposed Mediterranean Sea water quality standards in Israel
≤10 mg L-1 above the natural seasonal mean
Station
* The abnormally high TSS value at Station TF1 was most likely caused by the remotely operated vehicle hitting the
seafloor at this station; this value was excluded for the calculation of the Tamar Field mean.
Table 7. Station concentrations (mg L-1) and mean concentrations (± standard deviation [SD]) of total
nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) in seawater samples collected near the seafloor in the
Tamar Field. Mean (± SD) Levantine Basin baseline survey data and the proposed
Mediterranean Sea water quality standards in Israel are provided for comparison (MoEP,
2002).
TF1
TN
(mg L-1)
0.20
TP
(mg L-1)
0.009
TF2
TF3
TF4
TF5
TF6
TF7
0.13
0.14
0.14
0.26
0.14
0.16
0.012
0.013
0.013
0.009
0.009
0.009
TF8
TF9
Tamar Field mean
Proposed Mediterranean Sea water quality standards in Israel
0.17
0.20
0.17 ± 0.04
0.43 ± 0.47
1.0
0.011
0.011
0.011 ± 0.002
0.012 ± 0.012
0.1
Station
23
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Cadmium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Thallium
Vanadium
Zinc
Table 8. Metals concentrations (µg L-1) in seawater collected from Tamar Field sampling stations, with comparisons to toxicity reference values
(Criterion Continuous Concentration [CCC]) (Buchman, 2008), the proposed Mediterranean Sea water quality standards in Israel
(MoEP, 2002), and mean Levantine Basin baseline survey data.
TF1
<0.2
<7.0
10
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF2
<0.2
<7.0
10
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF3
<0.2
<7.0
10
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF4
<0.2
<7.0
9
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF5
<0.2
<7.0
9
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF6
<0.2
<7.0
9
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF7
<0.2
<7.0
9
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF8
<0.2
<7.0
9
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
TF9
<0.2
<7.0
9
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
Tamar Field mean
<0.2
<7.0
9.3 ± 0.5
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<0.1
<0.02
<1.0
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
<0.2
<7.0
9.0 ± 1.6
<0.5
<0.1
<10
<1.0
<1.0
<0.02
<0.1
<7.0
<0.1
<0.1
<10
<2.0
0.2
7
0.2
0.5
0.1
10
1
0.1
0.02
0.1
7
0.5
0.1
10
2
--
36
--
--
0.5
10
5
5
0.16
10
60
3
--
50
40
--
69
--
--
2
20
10
20
0.4
50
150
7
--
100
100
500p
36
200 BC
100 BC
9.3
50
3.1
8.1
0.94
8.2
71
0.95* (1/2)
17 NZ
50 BC
81
Station
Levantine Basin
baseline data
Method detection limit
of primary laboratory
Proposed
Mediterranean Sea
water quality standards
in Israel
CCC value
ND = not detected; QC = quality control sample.
* = Criterion Maximum Concentration.
(1/2)
= Criterion Maximum Concentration has been halved to be comparable to 1985 guidelines for minimum data requirements and derivation procedures.
p
= proposed.
Sources of CCC toxicity reference values: primary entry is the U.S. Ambient Water Quality Criteria; BC = British Columbia Water Quality Guidelines; NZ = Australian and New Zealand Environmental
Concern Levels and Trigger Values.
24
Hydrocarbons
Alkanes and TPH were not detected in seawater from the survey area (Appendix D), i.e., all results were
below the reported analytical limits of detection. Concentrations of alkanes were not detected by the
primary analytical and QC laboratories, indicating that no significant amounts of these hydrocarbons were
present in the water column. The method detection limit (MDL) for alkanes ranged between 0.069 µg L-1
(tetracosane [C24]) and 0.277 µg L-1 (tetradecane [C14]). The MDLs for TPH and all alkanes tested were
below the maximum Mediterranean Sea Water Quality concentration of 0.5 mg L-1 for mineral oils, fatty
substances, and oils (crude oil, hydrocarbons, and lubrication oils) (MoEP, 2002). There are no toxicity
reference values available for alkanes in seawater.
Seawater samples were analyzed for the following alkanes:
undecane (C11)
dodecane (C12)
tetradecane (C14)
hexadecane (C16)
octadecane (C18)
eicosane (C20)
tetracosane (C24)
octacosane (C28)
dotriacontane (C32)
hexatriacontane (C36)
tetracontane (C40)
PAH concentrations for analytes in seawater samples and MDLs for the primary analytical laboratory are
reported in Table 9. Individual PAH concentrations were low, and total PAH concentrations averaged
70.2 ± 52.4 ng L-1. All concentrations were below the mean Mediterranean Sea Water Quality
concentration of 5,000 ng L-1 for PAHs (MoEP, 2002).
Table 9. Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations (ng L-1) and means (± standard
deviation) in seawater collected from the Tamar Field.
PAH
Naphthalene
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Fluorene
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene /Triphenylene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(k,j)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Indeno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
Total PAHs
MDL
2.91
1.17
1.44
0.81
0.77
2.26
1.09
1.37
0.74
0.80
2.38
2.51
2.69
1.39
1.14
2.51
--
TF1
6.79
ND
ND
0.421
ND
1.45
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
49.9
TF2
5.25
ND
ND
0.390
ND
1.57
ND
0.509
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
47.7
TF3
5.01
ND
ND
0.368
ND
1.06
ND
0.247
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
50.1
TF4
6.32
ND
ND
0.37
ND
1.15
ND
0.347
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
58.8
Station
TF5
7.49
ND
ND
0.42
ND
1.20
ND
0.340
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
64.3
TF6
6.17
ND
ND
1.58
3.09
14.7
21.5
17.7
13.1
9.57
12.9
5.39
10.1
4.78
1.48
5.80
209
TF7
5.45
ND
ND
0.41
ND
1.08
ND
0.200
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
45.2
TF8
6.04
ND
ND
0.48
ND
1.37
ND
0.284
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
56.0
TF9
5.60
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
0.186
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
50.4
Tamar
Field Mean
6.0 ± 0.8
ND
ND
0.6 ± 0.4
ND
ND
ND
2.9 ± 4.8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
70.2 ± 52.4
MDL = method detection limit of the primary analytical laboratory; ND = not detected.
25
Radionuclides
Results of the seawater analysis of radionuclides (Ra 226 and Ra 228) are provided in Table 10 and
Appendix E. Mean concentrations of radionuclides (Ra 226 and Ra 228) in the Tamar Field were
0.12 ± 0.08 and 0.11 ± 0.12 pCi L-1, respectively.
Table 10. Mean and combined mean concentrations of radionuclides (radium 226 [Ra 226] and
radium 228 [Ra 228]) in seawater from the Tamar Field. Levantine Basin baseline survey data
are provided for comparison.
Station
TF1
TF2
TF3
TF4
TF5
TF6
TF7
TF8
TF9
Tamar Field mean
Ra 226
0.11
0.11
0.16
0.06
0.10
0.11
0.06
0.03
0.31
0.12 ± 0.08
0.09 ± 0.08
Concentration (pCi L-1)
Ra 228
Combined Ra 226 and Ra 228
0.20
0.31
0.21
0.32
0.08
0.24
0.00
0.06
0.33
0.43
0.11
0.22
0.00
0.06
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.36
0.11 ± 0.12
0.23 ± 0.14
0.18 ± 0.22
0.27 ± 0.23
The USEPA established a maximum contaminant level (MCL) for combined Ra 226 and Ra 228 at
5 pCi L-1 (USEPA, 1976). Combined Ra 226/228 concentrations in seawater from the Tamar Field
survey area averaged 0.23 ± 0.14 pCi L-1. The MCL is a maximum permissible level of a contaminant
that ensures the safety of the water over a lifetime of consumption and also takes into consideration
feasible treatment technologies and monitoring capabilities. These data indicate that naturally occurring
radium levels in seawater throughout the Tamar Field are extremely low and well below levels of
concern.
5.3.2
Sediment
Grain Size
Table 11 and Figures 6 and 7 summarize the grain size distribution and sediment type (Shepard, 1954) in
the Tamar Field and along the Tamar pipeline route. Laboratory reports for grain size analysis are
provided in Appendix F. Sand percentages were arcsine transformed to normalize the data. An analysis
of variance (ANOVA) conducted on the transformed data indicated that there was a significant difference
in sand composition of seafloor sediments among the survey strata (F5,24 = 2.74; P = 0.04). A least
significant difference multiple means comparison test showed that seafloor sediments collected from the
20 to 200 m depth stratum had a significantly higher percentage of sand than all other strata (t24;
P = <0.05); sediments from this stratum were classified as sand, sand/silt/clay, or clayey silt. Sediments
with in all other strata were composed primarily of clay with a significant silt fraction and were classified
as either clayey silt or silty clay (Table 11; Figure 6).
Grain size characteristics along the pipeline route were generally similar in water depths ≥200 m. At
depths of <200 m, the sand fraction of seafloor sediments increased as water depth decreased (Figure 6),
as would be expected when proximity to the shoreline increases. Sand composition of seafloor sediments
collected along the pipeline route are in general agreement with mean sand compositions measured during
26
Noble Energy environmental baseline and pre-drill surveys previously conducted by CSA at various
water depths throughout the Levantine Basin (Figure 7).
Table 11. Grain size distribution and sediment type at sediment sampling stations in the Tamar Field and
along the Tamar pipeline route.
Depth Strata
20 – 200 m
200 – 300 m
300 – 900 m
900 – 1,400 m
1,400 – 1,700 m
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Water Depth (m)
Station
Silt (%)
Clay (%)
Sand (%)
Sediment Type
20
36
46
71
95
186
216
247
255
A7
A6
A5
A4
A3
A2
A1
B4
B2
0.0
34.5
47.3
61.0
63.0
59.5
62.9
46.1
55.7
0.0
22.9
21.9
24.9
28.5
38.4
35.2
53.6
43.7
100.0
42.6
30.8
14.1
8.5
2.1
1.9
0.3
0.6
Sand
Sand/Silt/Clay
Sand/Silt/Clay
Clayey Silt
Clayey Silt
Clayey Silt
Clayey Silt
Silty clay
Clayey Silt
257
271
445
801
932
994
1,209
1,318
1,399
1,551
1,608
1,679
B3
B1
C4
C3
C2
C1
D3
D2
D1
E3
E2
E1
58.1
53.7
54.5
48.7
47.3
56.5
44.8
44.2
42.7
41.7
43.1
42.1
41.6
42.5
45.3
50.8
50.4
42.8
53.2
53.8
51.7
54.5
53.2
54.5
0.3
3.8
0.2
0.5
2.3
0.7
2.0
2.0
5.6
3.8
3.7
3.4
Clayey Silt
Clayey Silt
Clayey Silt
Silty clay
Silty clay
Clayey Silt
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
1,701
1,706
1,709
1,710
1,716
1,718
1,721
1,725
1,741
TF9
TF2
TF3
TF4
TF1
TF5
TF7
TF6
TF8
41.7
43.1
39.8
43.3
41.7
43.3
43.2
42.4
44.9
55.0
53.6
54.7
53.8
52.7
53.4
53.2
54.8
49.7
3.3
3.3
5.5
2.9
5.6
3.3
3.6
2.8
5.4
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
Silty clay
27
0
Tamar Field (~1,700 m)
1,700 - 1,400 m
1,400 - 900 m
900 - 300 m
300 - 200 m
200 - 20 m
100
10
90
Clay
20
80
30
40
70
Silty
Clay
Sandy
Silt
60
50
60
50
Clayey
Silt
Clayey
Sand
70
40
Sand/Silt/Clay
30
80
90
20
Silty
Sand
Sand
Sandy
Silt
10
Silt
100
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Figure 6. Ternary diagram showing grain size characteristics of sediments collected from Tamar Field
and Pipeline Survey strata.
120
20 - 200 m
200 - 300 m
300 - 900 m
900 - 1,400 m
1,400 - 1700 m
Tamar Field (1,700 m)
Seafloor Reference
100
% Sand
80
60
40
Karish-1
Mari-B/Tamar
platform
Pinnacles-1
20
Leviathan-4
0
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Seafloor Depth (m)
Figure 7. Percent sand composition of seafloor sediments collected from Tamar Field and Pipeline
Survey strata. Mean sand compositions from environmental baseline/pre-drill surveys
previously conducted by CSA (seafloor reference) are provided for comparison.
28
Mean percent TOC content in sediments collected from Tamar Field and pipeline route sampling strata
are shown in Figure 8. Analytical results for TOC in sediment samples are provided in Appendix G.
Sediment TOC concentrations were low (0.05% to 0.80%) throughout the survey area. The low TOC
content reflects the deep-sea environment and oligotrophic nature of the eastern Mediterranean.
1.00
a
TOC (%)
0.80
0.60
ab
ab
b
ab
ab
0.40
0.20
0.00
20 - 200 m
200 - 300 m
300 - 900 m
900 - 1,400 m 1,400 - 1,700 m
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Depth Stratum
Figure 8. Mean percent total organic carbon (TOC) composition (± standard error [indicated by black
error bars]) of seafloor sediments collected from Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey strata.
Different letters indicate statistical differences among depth strata.
There was a statistical difference in sediment TOC concentrations among survey strata (F5,24 = 2.71;
P = 0.04). A Tukey post-hoc multiple means comparison test indicated that sediment TOC concentrations
in the 20 to 200 m and 200 to 300 m strata were significantly different from each other (t24 = 3.11;
P = 0.048). Given the low overall percentage of TOC throughout the survey area, these differences are
unlikely to be biologically significant.
Total Metals
Values for total metals concentrations in sediment samples are provided in Table 12. Analytical results
are provided in Appendix H.
Total metals concentrations were generally within the range of concentrations found in mean marine
sediments (Salomons and Förstner, 1984) and the continental crust (Wedepohl, 1995) (Table 13), except
for arsenic and copper. Most metals values were generally lower than the Effects Range Low (ERL) and
Effects Range Median (ERM) values. Exceptions where a metals concentration was higher than the
corresponding ERL value but much lower than the corresponding ERM value occurred occasionally for
chromium and copper. Nickel exceeded both the ERL and ERM values at several stations; however it
must be noted that mean marine sediment and continental crust concentrations also exceed the ERM
value. A concentration below an ERL represents a minimal effects range where biological effects are
very rarely observed, while a concentration above an ERM represents an effects range where biological
effects are likely to be observed (Long and Morgan, 1990). Reported concentrations of arsenic and
copper in seafloor sediments are similar to ambient concentrations reported elsewhere within the
Levantine Basin (Table 13).
29
Selenium
(ppm)
Silver
(ppm)
3.12
0.16
1.85
<0.02
9.26
<0.5
<0.50
<0.5
45.6
15.4
55.6
30.1
1.55
25.3
0.08
37.0
0.62
0.59
<0.5
77.3
54.7
46
A5
6.97
<0.50
14.4
197.0
0.88
0.49
100.0
38.0
3.97
3.4
<0.02
42.4
<0.50
0.84
<0.5
115.0
63.3
71
A4
6.92
<0.50
19.2
172.0
0.91
0.50
79.0
35.8
4.11
4.11
≤0.02
50.7
<0.50
0.55
<0.5
133.0
74.4
95
A3
8.51
4.40
20.1
210.0
1.10
0.71
99.0
37.7
5.24
5.24
≤0.02
55.6
<0.50
0.57
<0.5
134.0
74.7
--
14.1
ND
294.0
1.26
0.19
93.6
43.2
6.74
0.02
11.4
59.5
ND
0.24
0.58
155.0
89.6
19.5
211.0
1.04
0.65
82.9
41.8
4.45
8.69
≤0.02
53.0
<0.50
0.50
<0.5
122.0
84.4
200 – 300 m
186
A2
8.09
<0.50
216
A1
7.14
<0.50
5.62
134.5
0.57
0.5
1.91
25.9
4.23
4.04
0.07
30.3
<0.50
0.67
<0.5
72.3
50.5
247
B4
6.47
0.89
20.5
187.0
1.21
0.75
94.1
48.9
7.27
8.85
0.07
55.9
<0.50
0.65
<0.5
136.5
75.9
255
B2
5.74
1.03
13.9
166.0
1.29
0.82
98.0
48.1
7.02
9.78
0.13
58.7
<0.50
0.55
<0.5
132.0
80.8
257
B3
5.79
0.83
14.8
149.0
1.05
0.74
80.8
40.2
6.74
12.2
0.17
47.4
<0.50
<0.50
<0.3
108.0
67.2
B3 - QC
300 – 900 m
900 – 1,400 m
Zinc
(ppm)
Nickel
(ppm)
72.2
0.65
Vanadium
(ppm)
Mercury
(ppm)
0.19
0.86
Thallium
(ppm)
Lead
(ppm)
0.31
176.0
Iron
(%)
299.0
21.9
Copper
ppm)
4.32
1.60
A3 - QC
Chromium
(ppm)
<0.50
4.03
Cadmium
(ppm)
2.08
A6
Beryllium
(ppm)
Antimony
(ppm)
A7
36
Barium
(ppm)
Aluminum
(%)
20
Arsenic
(ppm)
Station
20 – 200 m
Depth
(m)
Depth Stratum
Table 12. Total metals concentrations (ppm) in sediments collected along the Tamar pipeline route. Effects Range Low (ELM) and Effects Range
Median (ERM) values (Buchman, 2008) are provided for comparison.
--
11.1
ND
225.0
1.41
0.19
85.1
46.8
6.68
0.02
9.7
59.0
ND
0.25
0.60
136.0
1.10
271
B1
6.58
1.51
23.5
206.0
1.14
0.83
99.1
43.7
7.13
10.7
≤0.02
53.4
<0.50
0.55
<0.5
147.0
73.4
445
C4
6.73
<0.50
25.2
239.0
1.17
0.76
79.5
44.5
6.94
16.2
0.04
50.3
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
112.0
69.6
801
C3
7.88
1.01
21.8
169.0
1.17
0.66
98.9
45.1
6.56
24.3
0.10
58.8
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
97.8
70.5
--
18.1
0.5
271.0
1.62
0.24
82.7
54.5
6.76
0.03
32.1
65.8
ND
0.37
0.67
135.0
93.9
C3 - QC
932
C2
6.97
0.83
22.8
163.0
1.19
0.70
70.2
50.5
6.34
28.9
0.15
39.9
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
74.2
51.4
994
C1
6.28
1.17
36.4
243.0
1.36
0.80
72.9
55.0
5.71
40.7
0.06
56.2
<0.50
0.56
<0.5
104.0
72.2
1,209
D3
9.29
<0.50
12.8
109.0
1.10
0.51
64.9
47.0
6.35
15.9
0.03
48.5
0.85
0.59
0.7
102.0
67.2
1,318
D2
9.05
<0.50
11.7
97.1
1.10
0.51
64.3
46.2
6.2
11.8
0.04
48.3
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
100.0
66.2
1,399
D1
8.76
<0.50
11.1
110.0
1.20
0.60
63.1
47.3
5.95
11.0
0.04
48.2
<0.50
0.51
<0.5
94.9
64.4
30
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Station
Aluminum
(%)
Antimony
(ppm)
Arsenic
(ppm)
Barium
(ppm)
Beryllium
(ppm)
Cadmium
(ppm)
Chromium
(ppm)
Copper
ppm)
Iron
(%)
Lead
(ppm)
Mercury
(ppm)
Nickel
(ppm)
Selenium
(ppm)
Silver
(ppm)
Thallium
(ppm)
Vanadium
(ppm)
Zinc
(ppm)
1,400 – 1,700 m
Depth
(m)
Depth Stratum
1,551
E3
9.19
<0.50
14.0
97.6
1.10
0.50
62.5
49.1
6.15
14.5
0.04
47.2
1.00
1.4
0.94
95.5
61.0
1,608
E2
8.75
<0.50
12.7
95.4
1.00
0.51
62.5
50.9
5.88
13.4
0.10
49.2
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
95.6
64.9
1,679
E1
8.47
<0.50
12.5
92.9
1.00
0.44
58.5
49.2
5.50
11.1
0.04
46.8
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
88.9
56.7
1,701
TF9
2.52
<0.50
16.9
185.0
1.10
0.42
69.9
61.0
5.97
31.4
0.05
50.9
0.50
0.66
<0.5
91.6
68.1
1,706
TF2
7.59
<0.50
13.2
159.0
0.98
0.54
65.6
55.2
5.54
14.1
0.04
47.6
<0.50
1.90
<0.5
84.4
59.2
1,709
TF3
8.91
0.80
17.9
153.0
1.00
0.44
67.2
58.7
5.79
17.4
0.03
49.6
<0.50
0.92
<0.5
88.6
59.9
1,710
TF4
9.27
<0.50
14.3
185.0
1.10
0.48
72.7
62.7
6.19
19.1
0.06
59.6
0.85
2.70
<0.5
95.0
70.8
1,716
TF1
6.66
<0.50
13.3
305.0
0.83
0.47
52.0
46.5
4.66
19.4
0.04
38.5
0.69
0.95
<0.5
68.1
52.9
1,718
TF5
8.25
<0.50
15.8
205.0
1.10
0.46
67.2
56.9
5.81
15.1
0.04
50.0
<0.50
0.58
<0.5
89.2
64.8
1,721
TF7
7.97
<0.50
15.6
254.0
1.10
0.37
68.1
57.9
5.72
18.7
0.05
50.5
<0.50
1.10
<0.5
89.7
65.6
1,725
TF6
7.88
<0.50
13.1
249.0
1.10
0.40
70.2
59.8
5.86
14.5
0.04
52.3
<0.50
1.10
<0.5
93.2
66.1
1,741
TF8
7.40
<0.50
16.3
139.0
1.10
0.49
73.4
61.6
5.82
13.5
0.05
57.2
<0.50
<0.50
<0.5
99.1
71.2
ERL
--
8.2
--
--
--
1.2
81.0
34.0
--
0.15
20.9
46.70
--
--
--
1.0
150.0
ERM
--
70.0
--
--
--
9.6
370.0
270.0
--
0.71
51.6
218.00
--
--
--
3.7
410.0
-- = not available; QC = quality control sample.
31
Table 13. Mean (± standard deviation) total metals concentrations (ppm) in sediments collected from the Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey strata,
with comparisons to mean and range of metals concentrations within seafloor sediments of the Levantine Basin (CSA surveys), mean
marine sediments (Salomons and Förstner, 1984), continental crust (Wedepohl, 1995), and Effects Range Low (ERL) and Effects Range
Median (ERM) values (Buchman, 2008). Values exceeding the ERL values are shown in bold. Antimony, selenium, silver, and
thallium concentrations were below primary analytical laboratory detection limits and are not presented in the table.
Mean Total Concentration
Metal
Aluminum (%)
Arsenic (ppm)
Barium (ppm)
Beryllium
(ppm)
Cadmium
(ppm)
Chromium
(ppm)
Copper (ppm)
Iron (%)
Mercury (ppm)
Nickel (ppm)
Lead (ppm)
Vanadium
(ppm)
Zinc (ppm)
20 – 200 m
200 – 300 m
300 – 900 m
900 – 1,400 m
1,400 – 1,700 m
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Mean
Levantine
Basin
Mean
Continental
Marine
ERL ERM
Crust
Sediments
6.25 ± 2.33
6.15 ± 0.44
6.97 ± 0.67
9.03 ± 0.27
8.80 ± 0.36
7.38 ± 1.98
5.2 ± 3.1
15.01 ± 7.23
18.18 ± 4.60
26.55 ± 6.72
11.87 ± 0.86
13.07 ± 0.81
15.16 ± 1.76
17.8 ± 4.6
-7.7
7.96
1.7
-8.2
-70
203.5 ± 43.40
105.37 ± 7.18
95.30 ± 2.35
203.78 ± 55.11
130 ± 60.3
460
584
--
--
199.93 ± 51.12 177.00 ± 24.81
0.81 ± 0.28
1.17 ± 0.10
1.22 ± 0.09
1.13 ± 0.06
1.03 ± 0.06
1.05 ± 0.09
1.1 ± 0.3
2.0
--
--
--
0.53 ± 0.17
0.79 ± 0.05
0.73 ± 0.06
0.54 ± 0.05
0.48 ± 0.04
0.45 ± 0.05
0.6 ± 0.2
0.17
0.1
1.2
9.6
70.09 ± 33.76
93.00 ± 8.41
80.38 ± 12.95
64.10 ± 0.92
61.17 ± 2.31
67.37 ± 6.32
68.4 ± 16.1
72
126
81
370
30.35 ± 13.13
45.23 ± 4.06
48.78 ± 4.95
46.83 ± 0.57
49.73 ± 1.01
57.81 ± 4.86
51.8 ± 12.8
33
25
34
270
3.39 ± 1.82
7.04 ± 0.22
6.39 ± 0.52
6.17 ± 0.20
5.84 ± 0.33
5.71 ± 0.43
7.3 ± 11.9
--
4.32
--
--
0.03 ± 0.03
39.75 ± 16.23
7.52 ± 8.12
0.12 ± 0.05
53.85 ± 4.81
10.38 ± 1.43
0.09 ± 0.05
51.3 ± 8.39
27.53 ± 10.23
0.04 ± 0.01
48.33 ± 0.15
12.9 ± 2.63
0.06 ± 0.04
47.73 ± 1.29
13.00 ± 1.73
0.04 ± 0.04
50.69 ± 5.96
18.13 ± 5.47
0.08 ± 0.9
51.7 ± 10.0
16.6 ± 9.3
0.19
52
19
0.04
56
14.8
0.15
20.9
46.7
0.71
51.6
218
99.89 ± 34.63
130.88 ± 16.49
97.00 ± 16.27
98.97 ± 3.66
93.33 ± 3.84
88.77 ± 8.81
95.7 ± 24.4
150
98
--
--
59.63 ± 22.86
74.33 ± 5.66
65.93 ± 9.74
65.93 ± 1.42
60.87 ± 4.10
64.29 ± 5.97
76.8 ± 74.3
95
65
150
410
32
A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was performed to determine if seafloor sediment total
metals concentrations differed significantly among sampling strata. The MANOVA indicated that there
was a significant difference in total metals concentrations among strata (Wilks’ λ = 0.00; F65, 60 = 6.0;
P < 0.0001). Due to this significant MANOVA result, individual ANOVA tests were performed to
determine which metals differed significantly among strata.
There were no significant differences in concentrations of aluminum, chromium, mercury, nickel,
vanadium, or zinc among sampling strata (F5,24; P < 0.0001). There were significant differences among
strata in concentrations of beryllium (F5,24 = 4.78; P = 0.004), cadmium (F5,24 = 9.47; P < 0.0001), copper
(F5,24 = 10.81; P < 0.0001), and iron (F5,24 = 5.46; P = 0.002); however, these differences are primarily due
to a correlation between low metals concentrations and a higher percentage of sand within seafloor
sediments (r = -0.88 to -0.50; P < 0.05).
Concentrations of arsenic (F5,24 = 4.86; P = 0.003), barium (F5,24 = 4.87; P = 0.003), and lead (F5,24 = 5.99;
P = 0.001) also differed significantly among strata, although not due to any correlation in sediment grain
size characteristics (r = -0.34 to 0.36; P > 0.05). Arsenic and lead concentrations in seafloor sediments
were higher at stations in water depths between 300 and 900 m than in the rest of the survey area
(Table 13). All arsenic concentrations were at or below the Levantine Basin mean as determined from
samples collected in region of no anthropogenic development. All lead concentrations were well below
ERL values. Barium concentrations in seafloor sediments were lower at stations in water depths between
900 and 1,700 m than in the rest of the survey area. Barium concentrations in sediments from the Tamar
Field stations, which were located in water depths greater than 1,700 m, were similar to barium
concentrations in sediments collected from water depths of less than 900 m (Table 13).
Hydrocarbons
Alkanes and TPH were detected in sediments at low concentrations throughout the survey area. There are
no toxicity reference values available for alkanes in sediment. Mean alkane concentrations per stratum
and the primary laboratory’s MDL are reported in Table 14. Results from all stations are reported in
Appendix I. The results indicate that no significant amounts of these hydrocarbons are present in
seafloor sediments.
Table 14. Mean alkane concentrations in sediments collected from survey sampling strata.
Alkane
Undecane C11
Dodecane C12
Tetradecane C14
Hexadecane C16
Octadecane C18
Eicosane C20
Tetracosane C24
Octacosane C28
Dotriacontane C32
Hexatriacontane C36
Tetracontane C40
Method
Detection
Limit
0.016
0.019
0.013
0.004
0.004
0.012
0.005
0.011
0.012
0.016
0.019
Concentration (ppm)
Depth Stratum
20–200 m
200–300 m
300–900 m
900–1,400 m
1,400–1,700 m
0.002
0.018
0.021
0.019
0.058
0.038
0.037
0.026
0.026
0.006
0.000
0.006
0.014
0.016
0.025
0.084
0.036
0.042
0.054
0.094
0.038
0.043
0.005
0.012
0.009
0.020
0.034
0.018
0.038
0.044
0.061
0.045
0.049
0.008
0.015
0.013
0.033
0.039
0.025
0.043
0.050
0.060
0.046
0.055
0.006
0.011
0.009
0.022
0.027
0.021
0.030
0.040
0.043
0.030
0.035
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
0.000
0.010
0.013
0.020
0.044
0.022
0.045
0.036
0.024
0.027
0.000
33
There was a statistical difference in sediment TPH concentrations among survey strata (ANOVA;
F5,24 = 3.59; P = 0.014). A post-hoc multiple means comparison test indicated that sediment TPH
concentrations in the 20 to 200 m depth stratum are statistically greater than in most other strata
(Figure 9), although these differences are unlikely to be biologically significant.
70
a
60
TPH (ppm)
50
ab
40
30
b
b
b
20
b
10
0
20 - 200 m
200 - 300 m
300 - 900 m
900 -1,400 m 1,400 - 1,700 m Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Depth Stratum
Figure 9. Mean (± standard error [indicated by black error bars]) total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)
concentrations in sediments collected from survey sampling strata. Different letters indicate
significant differences among strata.
PAH concentrations detected in sediments were low throughout the survey area and well below ERL
concentrations. Mean PAH concentrations per stratum, the primary laboratory’s MDL, and ERL and
ERM values (Buchman, 2008) are reported in Table 15. ERL and ERM values provide a basis for
assessing the relative toxicity of an analyte in marine sediments. ERL values are considered to be
indicative of concentrations below which adverse effects rarely occur; ERM values are considered to be
indicative of concentrations above which adverse effects frequently occur. These results indicate that no
significant amounts of these hydrocarbons are present in the sediments. Results from all stations are
reported in Appendix I.
Table 15. Mean polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) concentrations in survey sampling strata
pipeline route.
Concentration (ppb)
Depth Stratum
PAH
ERL ERM
MDL
Naphthalene
160 2,100 0.342
Acenaphthylene
44 640 0.041
Acenaphthene
16 500 0.103
Fluorene
19 540 0.183
Anthracene
85.3 1,100 0.115
Phenanthrene
240 1,500 0.208
Fluoranthene
600 5,100 0.333
Pyrene
665 2,600 0.136
Benz(a)anthracene
261 1,600 0.192
Chrysene/triphenylene 384 2,800 0.116
--0.203
--0.098
20–200 m 200–300 m 300–900 m 900–1,400 m 1,400–1,700 m
2.69
1.04
0.83
1.31
1.43
8.24
11.06
8.48
6.98
6.83
9.70
3.45
4.01
0.46
0.77
1.11
1.15
6.23
5.52
4.84
2.29
3.19
4.38
1.20
1.86
0.27
0.48
0.39
0.33
3.03
3.50
3.04
1.76
2.60
4.05
1.27
3.11
0.37
0.53
0.51
0.41
4.17
3.86
3.38
2.05
3.11
4.93
1.59
1.34
0.24
0.37
0.36
0.21
2.37
2.16
1.88
1.13
1.72
2.96
0.94
Tamar
Field
(1,700 m)
1.69
0.30
0.67
0.63
0.26
3.76
2.79
2.01
1.27
1.97
3.72
1.17
ERL = Effects Range Low; ERM = Effects Range Median; MDL = method detection limit.
34
There was a statistical difference in total PAH concentrations among survey strata (ANOVA; F5,24 = 7.52;
P = 0.0002). A post-hoc multiple means comparison test indicated that sediment PAH concentrations in
the 20 to 200 m and 200 to 300 m depth strata were statistically greater than most other strata
(Figure 10). These PAH concentrations are well below the ERL (4,022 ppb) and ERM (44,792 ppb)
concentrations reported for total PAH concentrations in marine sediment (Buchman, 2008) and are
therefore unlikely to be biologically significant.
350
a
300
PAH (ppb)
250
b
200
150
100
c
bc
c
50
c
0
20 - 200 m
200 - 300 m
300 - 900 m
900 -1,400 m 1,400 - 1,700 m
Depth Stratum
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
Figure 10. Mean (± standard error [indicated by black error bars]) total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
(PAH) concentrations in sediments collected along the Tamar pipeline route. Different letters
indicate significant differences among strata.
Radionuclides
Radionuclide samples were collected only within the Tamar Field strata. Mean (± standard deviation)
radionuclide concentrations are provided in Table 16. Results for each individual sampling station are
provided in Appendix J. Radionuclide concentrations were low in all samples.
Table 16. Mean (± standard deviaton) concentrations of radionuclides (radium 226, radium 228, and
thorium 228) in sediments collected from the Tamar Field.
Station
TF1
TF2
TF3
TF4
TF5
TF6
TF7
TF8
TF9
Radium 226
0.42
0.45
0.21
0.27
0.39
0.35
0.29
0.52
0.27
0.35 ± 0.10
0.47 ± 0.14
Concentration (pCi g-1)
Radium 228
0.72
0.43
0.61
1.06
0.51
0.62
0.28
0.60
0.42
0.58 ± 0.22
0.54 ± 0.24
Thorium 228
0.64
0.60
0.56
0.66
0.68
0.73
0.67
0.63
0.72
0.65 ± 0.05
0.59 ± 0.07
35
Ambient radium concentrations in most natural soils and rocks are approximately 0.5 to 5.0 pCi g-1 of
total radium (U.S. Geological Survey, 1999). Ambient concentrations of Th 228 in sediments range from
0.36 to 1.93 pCi g-1 (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1990). USEPA (1998)
established a protective health based level for radium and thorium of 5 pCi g-1 at the sediment surface as a
threshold for the cleanup of the top 15 cm of soil from contaminated U.S. Superfund sites.
These data indicate that ambient radionuclide concentrations in sediments from the Tamar Field strata are
considered natural ambient concentrations (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1990;
U.S. Geological Survey, 1999) and are below levels of concern as outlined by the USEPA (1998)
protective health based level recommendations.
5.4
INFAUNA
Distributions of species found in Tamar Field and Pipeline infaunal samples according to major
taxonomic groups and subgroups are shown in Tables 17 to 22. The 60 infaunal benthic samples
(30 stations × 2 replicates) yielded 4,826 individual organisms. They were assigned to 14 taxa and
185 taxonomic subgroups. The lowest total abundances (28 individuals per m2) were recorded in the
Tamar Field (Table 17), and the highest total abundances (4,157 individuals per m2) were found near
shore in water depths from 20 to 200 m (Table 22). Figure 11 shows that infaunal diversity by
taxonomic grouping was generally similar among all survey strata, with polychaetes being the most
dominant taxa.
100%
Taxa Abundance (%)
80%
60%
Other
Polychaeta
40%
Crustacea
Mollusca
20%
0%
1,400 - 1,700 m
900 - 1,400 m
300 - 900 m
200 - 300 m
20 - 200 m
Depth Stratum (m)
Figure 11. Percent abundance of infaunal organisms (by taxonomic grouping) within the Tamar Field and
Pipeline Survey strata. The “Other” category is composed of some combination of the
following taxa, dependent upon strata: Platyhelmentes, Nemertea, Pychogonida, Sipunculida,
Echiuridea, Echinodermata, Enteropneusta, and Phoronida.
Tamar Field (1,700 m depth) Depth Stratum
In the Tamar Field portion of the survey area, located in a water depth of approximately 1,700 m,
polychaete worms were the most dominant taxa and accounted for over 62% of the total infaunal
abundance. The polychaete worms Notomastus sp. and Autolytinae sp. (Image 6) were the most abundant
organisms at this depth (Table 17). Crustacea accounted for 25% of the total infaunal abundance and
were primarily composed of Caridea sp. (Table 17).
36
Image 6. Specimen of the polychaetous annelids Notomastus sp. (left) and Autolytinae sp. (right).
Table 17. Taxonomic listing and total abundance distribution of major taxa and subgroups in infaunal
samples collected from the Tamar Field strata (1,700 m water depth).
Taxonomic Group
Lowest Practical Identification Level
(Taxonomic Subgroups)
Cardiomya costellata
Abundance
(number of specimens)
1
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
0.89
Bathyarca sp.
Yoldiella sp.
Bruzelia sp.
Caridea sp.
Asellota sp.
Tanaidacea sp.
Colletteidae sp.
Notomastus sp.
Glycera lapidium
Autolytinae sp.
Cirratulidae sp.
Spionidae sp.
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
6
3
5
1
3
0.89
0.89
0.89
2.67
0.89
0.89
1.78
5.33
2.67
4.44
0.89
2.67
3
3
3
9
3
3
6
19
9
16
3
9
1
1
1
32
0.89
0.89
0.89
28.44
3
3
3
100
Mollusca-Bivalvia
Crustacea
Polychaeta
Sipunculida
Paraonides sp. 1 EcoA
Paraonis sp.
Sipuncula sp.
Total
Total Fauna (%)
3
1,400 to 1,700 m Depth Stratum
In the portion of the pipeline located in water depths between 1,400 and 1,700 m, polychaete worms were
the most dominant taxa and accounted for 56% of the total infaunal abundance. Taxa consisting of
crustacea and mollusca-bivalvia accounted for 22% and 28% of all organisms, respectively. Only one or
two individuals of each species were collected at this water depth; therefore no species was particularly
dominant over any other (Table 18).
37
samples collected from stations in the 1,400 to 1,700 m depth stratum.
Taxonomic Group
Mollusca-Bivalvia
Crustacea
Polychaeta
Bivalvia sp.
Yoldiella sp.
Pseudotiron bouvieri
Tanaidacea sp.
Tanaellidae sp.
Notomastus sp.
Glycera lapidium
Polynoidae sp.
Syllis sp.
Cirratulidae sp.
Spionidae sp.
Terebellides stroemii
Total
Abundance
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
18
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
2.67
5.33
2.67
2.67
5.33
5.33
5.33
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
5.33
48
Total Fauna
(%)
6
11
6
6
11
11
11
6
6
6
6
6
11
100
900 to 1,400 m Depth Stratum
In the portion of the pipeline located in water depths between 900 and 1,400 m, polychaete worms were
the most dominant taxa and accounted for 50% of the total infaunal abundance. The polychaete worm
Notomastus sp. (Image 6) was the most abundant organism at this depth (Table 19). Taxa consisting of
crustacea and mollusca-bivalvia each accounted for 20% of infaunal organisms. Mollusca-bivalvia was
composed exclusively of Yoldiella sp. (Table 19, Image 7).
samples collected from stations in the 900 to 1,400 m depth stratum.
Taxonomic Group
Mollusca-Bivalvia
Crustacea
Polychaeta
Echiuridae
Lowest Practical Identification
Level (Taxonomic Subgroups)
Yoldiella sp.
Hyperiidea sp.
Phoxocephalidae sp.
Asellota sp.
Anthuridae sp.
Tanaellidae sp.
Leiocapitella sp.
Notomastus sp.
Syllis sp.
Autolytinae sp.
Cirratulidae sp.
Spionidae sp.
Aricidea (Allia) monicae
Echiurus abyssalis
Total
Abundance
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
6
2
1
1
2
1
1
25
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
13.33
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
2.67
16.00
5.33
2.67
2.67
5.33
2.67
2.67
66.67
Total Fauna
(%)
20
4
4
4
4
4
4
24
8
4
4
8
4
4
100
300 to 900 m Depth Stratum
In the portion of the pipeline located in water depths between 300 and 900 m, polychaete worms were the
most dominant taxa and accounted for 50% of the total infaunal abundance, with Notomastus sp. being
the most dominant polychaete (Image 6). The most dominant organism was a crustacean, Apseudopsis
acutifrons (Image 8), that accounted for 25% of the total organisms collected in this depth range
(Table 20).
38
samples collected from stations in the 300 to 900 m depth stratum.
Taxonomic Group
Nemertea
Mollusca-Bivalvia
Mollusca-Gastropoda
Crustacea
Polychaeta
Sipunculida
Echinodermata
Palaeonemertea sp.
Bivalvia sp.
Tropidomya abbreviata
Ennucula aegeensis
Yoldiella sp.
Pyramidellidae sp.
Eriopisa elongata
Podocerus variegatus
Bruzelia typica
Nannastacidae sp.
Asellota sp.
Amakusanthura pori
Agathotanaidae sp.
Apseudopsis acutifrons
Tanaellidae sp.
Typhlotanais angstromensis
Neoheteromastus sp.
Notomastus sp.
Ophelia sp.
Glycera lapidium
Gallardoneris sp. 1 EcoA
Sphaerodoropsis sp. 1 EcoA
Syllis sp.
Ampharetidae sp.
Spiochaetopterus sp.
Diplocirrus sp.
Spionidae sp.
Cirrophorus sp.
Levinsenia sp.
Sipuncula sp.
Spatangoida sp.
Total
Abundance
3
2
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
26
2
1
4
13
2
1
1
7
4
1
4
1
3
1
9
1
1
102
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
6
4
2
2
10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
52
4
2
8
26
4
2
2
14
8
2
8
2
6
2
18
2
2
204
Total Fauna
(%)
3
2
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
25
2
1
4
13
2
1
1
7
4
1
4
1
3
1
9
1
1
100
Image 7. Specimen of the bivalve mollusk Yoldiella sp. Image 8. Specimen of the crustacean Apseudopsis
acutifrons.
39
most dominant taxa and accounted for 57% of the total infaunal abundance. The most dominant organism
in this water depth range was a bivalve mollusk, Bivalvia sp. (Image 9), that accounted for 20% of the
total organisms collected at this depth (Table 21).
Image 9. Specimen of the bivalve mollusk Bivalvia sp.
samples collected from stations in the 200 to 300 m depth stratum.
Taxonomic Group
Nemertea
Mollusca-Aplacophora
Mollusca-Bivalvia
Mollusca-Gastropoda
Lineidae sp.
Palaeonemertea sp.
Neomeniomorpha sp.
Falcidens sp.
Limifossor sp.
Chevroderma sp.
Spathoderma sp.
Bivalvia sp.
Nuculanidae sp.
Nuculidae sp.
Ennucula aegeensis
Ennucula sp.
Axinulus croulinensis
Thyasira sp.
Thyasira biplicata
Nassarius elatus
Alvania sp.
Abundance
1
21
1
39
2
8
18
212
1
16
8
6
17
89
1
4
5
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
2
42
2
78
4
16
36
424
2
32
16
12
34
178
2
8
10
Total Fauna
(%)
0.1
2.1
0.1
3.9
0.2
0.8
1.8
20.9
0.1
1.6
0.8
0.6
1.7
8.8
0.1
0.4
0.5
40
Taxonomic Group
Crustacea
Polychaeta
Echinodermata
Enteropneusta
Carangoliopsis spinulosa
Eriopisa elongata
Phoxocephalidae sp.
Eudorella sp.
Asellota sp.
Apseudopsis acutifrons
Colletteidae sp.
Pseudotanais stiletto
Tanaellidae sp.
Neoheteromastus sp.
Cossura sp.
Praxillella gracilis
Ophelia sp.
Glycera lapidium
Podarkeopsis sp.
Abyssoninoe sp. 1 EcoA
Ninoe sp.
Nephtys sp.
Drilonereis filum
Pholoe sp.
Ancistrosyllis groenlandica
Litocorsa sp.
Sigalion sp.
Exogone sp.
Syllis sp.
Autolytinae sp.
Cirratulidae sp.
Monticellina sp.
Jasmineira sp.
Spionidae sp.
Prionospio sp.
Spiophanes sp.
Sternaspis sp.
Sternaspis scutata
Aricidea (Acmira) catherinae
Aricidea (Allia) antennata
Aricidea (Aricidea) wassi
Aricidea sp. 1 EcoA
Levinsenia sp.
Ophiuroidea sp.
Enteropneusta sp.
Total
Abundance
24
2
14
1
2
2
11
8
6
9
32
2
1
5
5
4
22
4
28
1
8
5
1
1
5
1
1
4
10
10
1
14
40
7
19
13
9
4
17
61
89
50
9
1
1,012
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
48
4
28
2
4
4
22
16
12
18
64
4
2
10
10
8
44
8
56
2
16
10
2
2
10
2
2
8
20
20
2
28
80
14
38
26
18
8
34
122
178
100
18
2
2,024
Total Fauna
(%)
2.4
0.2
1.4
0.1
0.2
0.2
1.1
0.8
0.6
0.9
3.2
0.2
0.1
0.5
0.5
0.4
2.2
0.4
2.8
0.1
0.8
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.4
1.0
1.0
0.1
1.4
4.0
0.7
1.9
1.3
0.9
0.4
1.7
6.0
8.8
4.9
0.9
0.1
100
most dominant taxa and accounted for over 47% of the total infaunal abundance. The polychaete worms
Jasmineira sp. (Image 10) and Prionospio sp. (Image 11) were the most abundant organisms at this
depth (Table 22) accounting for 13% and 7% of the total organisms collected, respectively.
41
Image 10. Specimen of the polychaetous annelid
Jasmineria sp.
Image 11. Specimen of polychaetous annelid
Prionospio sp.
samples collected from stations located in the 20 to 200 m depth stratum.
Taxonomic Group
Platyhelmentes-Turellaria
Nemertea
Mollusca-Aplacophora
Mollusca-Bivalvia
Abundance
Turbellaria sp.
3
Lineidae sp.
6
Palaeonemertea sp.
11
Neomeniomorpha sp.
2
Chaetoderma sp.
13
Falcidens sp.
27
Chevroderma sp.
7
Spathoderma sp.
15
Bivalvia sp.
175
1
Cuspidaria sp.
2
Lyonsia sp.
3
Thraciidae sp.
1
Anadara sp.
4
Glycymeris glycymeris
1
Glycymeris nummaria
1
Corbula gibba
102
Nuculanidae sp.
2
Nuculidae sp.
11
Ennucula aegeensis
8
Parvicardium minimum
37
Parvicardium sp.
5
Loripes lucinalis
1
Lucinella divaricata
1
Abra longicallus
23
Abra sp.
16
Axinulus croulinensis
1
Thyasira sp.
49
Thyasira biplicata
5
Veneridae sp.
50
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
3.43
6.86
12.57
2.29
14.86
30.86
8.00
17.14
200.00
1.14
2.29
3.43
1.14
4.57
1.14
1.14
116.57
2.29
12.57
9.14
42.29
5.71
1.14
1.14
26.29
18.29
1.14
56.00
5.71
57.14
Total Fauna
(%)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.4
4.8
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.1
0.3
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.4
0.0
1.3
0.1
1.4
42
Taxonomic Group
Mollusca-Gastropoda
Mollusca-Scaphopoda
Crustacea
Pycnogonida
Abundance
Gastropoda sp.
2
Ringicula conformis
1
Philinidae sp.
6
Retusa mammillata
1
Volvulella acuminata
4
Eulimella sp.
5
Odostomia sp.
1
Turbonilla sp.
1
Neogastropoda sp.
22
Nassarius elatus
1
Turridae sp.
2
Naticidae sp.
1
Rissoidae sp.
1
Alvania sp.
3
Conomurex persicus
2
Antalis sp.
1
Ampelisca sp.
93
Leptocheirus sp.
4
Carangoliopsis spinulosa
9
Medicorophium runcicorne
6
Gammaridae sp.
2
Isaeidae sp.
6
Cheiriphotis mediterranea
167
Photis sp.
6
Ischyroceridae sp.
7
Leucothoe sp.
1
Lysianassidae sp.
2
Eriopisa elongata
5
Oedicerotidae sp.
8
Phoxocephalidae sp.
38
Eudorella sp.
4
Brachyura sp.
1
Paguroidea sp.
1
Alpheidae sp.
4
Crangonidae sp.
1
Diogenes pugilator
1
Jaxea nocturna
1
Leptochela pugnax
1
Portunidae sp.
1
Asellota sp.
1
Gnathiidea sp.
3
Isopoda sp.
1
Kupellonura mediterranea
5
Tanaidacea sp.
1
Agathotanaidae sp.
15
Apseudes sp.
77
Colletteidae sp.
10
Cristapseudes omercooperi
127
Leptochelia tanykeraia
7
Pseudotanais stiletto
12
Tanaellidae sp.
3
Typhlotanais angstromensis
25
Phoxichilidiidae sp.
53
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
2.29
1.14
6.86
1.14
4.57
5.71
1.14
1.14
25.14
1.14
2.29
1.14
1.14
3.43
2.29
1.14
106.29
4.57
10.29
6.86
2.29
6.86
190.86
6.86
8.00
1.14
2.29
5.71
9.14
43.43
4.57
1.14
1.14
4.57
1.14
1.14
1.14
1.14
1.14
1.14
3.43
1.14
5.71
1.14
17.14
88.00
11.43
145.14
8.00
13.71
3.43
28.57
60.57
Total Fauna
(%)
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.0
2.6
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
4.6
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.4
2.1
0.3
3.5
0.2
0.3
0.1
0.7
1.5
43
Taxonomic Group
Polychaeta
Abundance
Capitella sp.
1
Leiocapitella sp.
1
Mediomastus sp.
11
Neoheteromastus sp.
6
Notomastus sp.
136
Cossura sp.
42
Clymenella sp.
2
Maldane sp.
2
Micromaldane sp.
1
Praxillella gracilis
5
Rhodine loveni
13
Nereis sp.
4
Alciopidae sp.
1
Ophryotrocha sp.
3
Glycera lapidium
33
Podarkeopsis sp.
6
Abyssoninoe sp. 1 EcoA
10
39
Nephtys sp.
102
Eunereis sp.
1
Drilonereis filum
1
Onuphis sp.
15
Paradiopatra sp.
1
Paralacydonia sp.
2
Pholoe sp.
15
Phyllodoce sp.
2
Ancistrosyllis groenlandica
38
Litocorsa sp.
3
Sigambra tentaculata
127
Polynoidae sp.
3
Lepidonotinae sp.
1
Sigalion sp.
18
15
Exogone sp.
20
Sphaerosyllis sp.
1
Autolytinae sp.
4
Acrocirridae sp.
2
Eclysippe sp.
11
Melinna sp.
22
Spiochaetopterus sp.
8
Cirratulidae sp.
71
Chaetozone sp.
1
Monticellina sp.
70
Diplocirrus sp.
2
Magelona sp.
133
Owenia fusiformis
2
Owenia sp.
2
Pectinaria sp.
6
Poecilochaetus sp.
17
Chone sp.
23
Euchone sp.
3
Jasmineira sp.
457
Spionidae sp.
18
Polydora sp.
44
Prionospio sp.
266
Pseudopolydora sp.
3
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
1.14
1.14
12.57
6.86
155.43
48.00
2.29
2.29
1.14
5.71
14.86
4.57
1.14
3.43
37.71
6.86
11.43
44.57
116.57
1.14
1.14
17.14
1.14
2.29
17.14
2.29
43.43
3.43
145.14
3.43
1.14
20.57
17.14
22.86
1.14
4.57
2.29
12.57
25.14
9.14
81.14
1.14
80.00
2.29
152.00
2.29
2.29
6.86
19.43
26.29
3.43
522.29
20.57
50.29
304.00
3.43
Total Fauna
(%)
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.2
3.7
1.2
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.9
0.2
0.3
1.1
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.1
1.0
0.1
3.5
0.1
0.0
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.6
0.2
2.0
0.0
1.9
0.1
3.7
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.6
0.1
12.6
0.5
1.2
7.3
0.1
44
Abundance
Scolelepis sp.
1
Spiophanes sp.
16
Sternaspis sp.
3
Sternaspis scutata
3
Polycirrinae sp.
1
Terebellides stroemii
5
10
Aricidea (Aricidea) wassi
8
Aricidea sp. 1 EcoA
79
Cirrophorus branchiatus
2
Levinsenia sp.
97
Sipuncula sp.
4
Apionsoma murinae bilobatae
2
Thysanocardia procera
4
Ophiuroidea sp.
191
Amphiodia obtecta
7
Amphiura filiformis
1
Enteropneusta sp.
2
Phoronida sp.
9
Total
3,637
Taxonomic Group
Sipunculida
Echinodermata
Enteropneusta
Phoronida
Abundance
(individuals m-2)
1.14
18.29
3.43
3.43
1.14
5.71
11.43
9.14
90.29
2.29
110.86
4.57
2.29
4.57
218.29
8.00
1.14
2.29
10.29
4156.57
Total Fauna
(%)
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.2
2.2
0.1
2.7
0.1
0.1
0.1
5.3
0.2
0.0
0.1
0.2
100
Station Abundance and Diversity Metrics
Individual station abundance and diversity metrics are shown in Figure 23. The number of taxonomic
subgroups was statistically different among survey strata (ANOVA; df5,24 = 59.24; P < 0.0001). There
were a significantly greater number of taxonomic subgroups in stations from the shallower depth strata
(20 to 200 m and 200 to 300 m) than in all other strata (Table 23, Figure 12).
75
# of Taxonomic Subgroups
a
50
b
25
c
c
c
c
m
20
-2
00
m
-3
00
20
0
30
0
-9
00
m
m
-1
,4
00
m
90
0
-1
,7
00
1,
40
0
Ta
m
ar
Fi
el
d
(1
,7
00
m
)
0
Depth Stratum
Figure 12. Mean (± standard deviation) number of taxonomic subgroups among survey sampling strata.
Different letters indicate significant differences among strata.
45
Table 23. Benthic community parameters at infaunal sampling stations during the Tamar Field and
Pipeline Survey.
Depth Stratum
Tamar Field
(1,700 m)
1,400–1,700 m
900–1,400 m
300–900 m
200–300 m
20–200 m
Station
Number of Taxonomic
Subgroups per Station
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1
4
1
6
4
1
4
3
2
3
10
1
5
5
9
6
11
6
20
22
46
38
36
42
41
53
59
59
55
41
Number of
Individuals
per Station
1
5
3
8
4
1
4
3
3
3
14
1
8
5
12
11
33
16
42
106
407
224
275
316
288
558
341
621
1,230
283
Pileou's
Evenness (J')
Log Series Fisher's
alpha
Shannon-Weiner
Diversity (H')
-0.96
-0.93
1.00
-1.00
1.00
0.92
1.00
0.97
-0.93
1.00
0.95
0.79
0.73
0.83
0.91
0.89
0.80
0.83
0.79
0.87
0.81
0.71
0.85
0.79
0.63
0.69
-9.28
0.53
10.91
----2.62
-15.65
-5.71
-16.36
5.40
5.78
3.49
14.96
8.44
13.33
13.13
11.07
13.00
13.07
14.39
20.59
16.02
11.82
13.17
0.00
1.33
0.00
1.67
1.39
0.00
1.39
1.10
0.64
1.10
2.24
0.00
1.49
1.61
2.09
1.42
1.74
1.49
2.74
2.76
3.08
3.00
2.82
3.25
3.00
2.83
3.46
3.23
2.51
2.57
The number of individuals per station was statistically different among survey strata (ANOVA;
df5,24 = 8.82; P < 0.0001), with the greatest numbers of organisms found in the 20 to 200 m water depth
stratum (Table 23, Figure 13).
Pileou’s evenness was moderate to high when averaged for each stratum and generally consistent among
strata. Stations in the 20 to 200 m water depth stratum had the lowest evenness value (0.63 to 0.87), and
stations in the 1,400 to 1,700 m water depth stratum had the highest evenness values (0.97 to 1.00)
(Table 23).
Species diversity, as calculated by the Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index, was moderate to high (2.51 to
3.46) in stations in water depths < 300 m and low (0.00 to 1.67) in stations in water depths >1,400 m.
The Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index operates on a scale of 0 (lowest diversity) to 4 (highest diversity).
46
1000
a
800
600
ab
# of Individuals
400
200
50
b
25
b
b
b
m
20
-2
00
m
-3
00
20
0
30
0
-9
00
m
m
-1
,4
00
m
90
0
-1
,7
00
1,
40
0
Ta
m
ar
Fi
el
d
(1
,7
00
m
)
0
Depth Stratum
Figure 13. Mean (± standard deviation) number of individuals collected from survey sampling strata.
Different letters indicate significant differences among strata. Note scale break in y-axis.
5.5
VIDEOGRAPHY
Results from the video data presented within this report were also presented in the Tamar Environmental
Monitoring Program – Visual Survey Report (CSA Ocean Sciences Inc., 2013).
The seafloor of the entire survey area was characterized by a relatively flat topography and soft bottom
substrate (Image 12). A substantial amount of drilling infrastructure was present on the seafloor near the
wellsites. A moderate amount of disturbed sediment was observed, especially near the wellheads
(Image 13). These disturbances were likely caused by well drilling and completion, pipe-laying, and
ROV activities. The areal extent of these disturbances was small compared to the geographic size of the
survey area, and no substantial impact on benthic communities was likely.
Anthropogenic debris (i.e., trash bags, glass bottles, assorted plastics) was observed within the survey
area, as were drilling muds and cuttings near several of the wellsites (Image 14). No hard bottom
substrate or chemosynthetic communities were observed within the survey area.
47
The sonar images had a much larger field of view (75 m) than the video images and provided a better
depiction of the seafloor necessary to discern large-scale topographic variations. The sonar data
confirmed the information collected from video data, specifically that the survey area around the wellsites
was characterized by relatively smooth low-relief, apparently soft substrate (Image 20).
radius = 75 m
Image 20. Mosaic of forward-looking sonar images (approximately 75-m radius) collected while the remotely
operated vehicle was oriented on headings of 0° and 180° at the Tamar 3 wellsite. Light brown areas
indicate smooth seafloor topography; darker browns and black areas were shaded from the acoustic signal
and indicate depressed areas. Pink areas indicate a high amount of acoustic signal reflection and reveal
the presence of drilling infrastructure. A pipeline is visible in the top half of the image. The observed
dimpling effect is caused by subtle small-scale variation in the topography, most likely due to the small
mounds and burrows present within the survey area.
57
6.0 LITERATURE CITED
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1990. Toxicological profile for thorium. Agency
for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Health Service, Atlanta, GA, in
collaboration with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website accessed on
21 May 2013. www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp147.pdf
Bethoux, J.P., P. Morin, C. Madec, and B. Gentili. 1992. Phosphorous and nitrogen behavior in the
Mediterranean Sea. Deep Sea Research 39(1):1,641-1,654.
Buchman, M.F. 2008. Screening quick reference tables. NOAA OR&R Report 08-1. NOAA, Office of
Response and Restoration, Seattle, WA. 34 pp.
Clarke, K.R. and R.N. Gorley. 2006. PRIMER v6: User Manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E, Plymouth.
190 pp.
CSA Ocean Sciences Inc. 2013. Tamar Environmental Monitoring Program Visual Survey Report.
Prepared for Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. 16 pp. + apps.
Fisher, R.A., A.S. Carbet, and C.B. Williams. 1943. The relation between the number of species and the
number of individuals in a random sample from an animal population. Journal of Animal
Ecology 12(2):42-58.
Hurlbert, S.H. 1984. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecological
Monographs 54(2): 187 – 211.
Krom, M.D. 1995. Oceanography of the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. Challenger Society 5:22-28.
Long, E.R. and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants
tested in the National Status and Trends Program. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOS OMA 52.
U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WA. 175 pp.
Magurran, A.E. 1988. Ecological Diversity and Its Measurement. Princeton University Press, Princeton,
NJ. 179 pp.
Ministry of the Environment. 2002. Environmental Quality Standards for the Mediterranean Sea in
Israel.
Salomons, W. and U. Förstner. 1984. Metals in the Hydrocycle. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 349 pp.
Shepard, F.P. 1954. Nomenclature based on sediment: H-clay ratios. Journal of Sediment Petrology
24:151-158.
Taylor, L.R. 1978. Bates, Williams, Hutchinson–a variety of diversities, pp. 1-18. In: L.A. Mound and
N. Warloff (eds.), Diversity of insect faunas. 9th Symposium of the Royal Entomological
Society, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford. x + 204 pp.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976. Interim primary drinking water regulations promulgation of regulations on radionuclides: Federal Register, v. 41, July 9, 1976, Part II,
pp. 28,402-29,409.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Use of soil cleanup in 40 CFR Part 192 as remediation
goals for CERCLA sites: EPA OSWER Directive 9200.4-25.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Methods for collection, storage and manipulation of
sediments for chemical and toxicological analysis. EPA-823-B-01-002. Office of Water,
Washington, DC, USA.
58
U.S. Geological Survey. 1999. Naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) in produced water and
oil-field equipment - An issue for the energy industry. Website accessed on 21 May 2013.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0142-99/fs-0142-99.pdf
Wedepohl, K.H. 1995. The composition of the continental crust. Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta 59:1,217-1,239.
Yilmaz, K., A. Yilmaz, S. Yemeniciouglu, M. Sur, I. Salihoglu, Z. Karabulut, F. Telli Karakoc,
E. Hatipoglu, A.F. Gaines, D. Phillips, and A. Hewer. 1998. Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin 36(11):922-925.
59
APPENDICES
60
APPENDIX A
Scope of Work/Sampling and Analysis Plan for the
A-1
TAMAR FIELD AND PIPELINE SURVEY
TAMAR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
OFFSHORE ISRAEL
Scope of Work/Sampling and Analysis Plan
March 2013
Prepared for:
Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd.
Ackerstein Towers, Building D
12 Abba Eben Boulevard
Herzelia Pituach, Israel 46725
Prepared by:
8502 SW Kansas Avenue
Stuart, Florida 34997
A-2
AUTHOR CERTIFICATION SIGNATURE
Project Manager
Senior Scientist – Marine Specialist
A-3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Tables .............................................................................................................................................. iii
List of Figures............................................................................................................................................. iii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 4
1.2 PURPOSE....................................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 SURVEY COMPONENTS ......................................................................................................................... 6
3.0 STATION CONFIGURATION ................................................................................................................... 8
4.0 PROJECT TEAM AND CORPORATE QUALIFICATIONS ....................................................................... 10
4.1 KEY PERSONNEL ...................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 LABORATORIES ........................................................................................................................ 10
4.2.1 Weatherford Laboratories ................................................................................................. 11
4.2.2 TAMI IMI Institute for Research and Development ........................................................ 11
4.2.3 TDI-Brooks/B&B Laboratories ........................................................................................ 12
4.2.4 ALS Environmental .......................................................................................................... 12
4.2.5 EcoAnalysts, Inc. .............................................................................................................. 13
5.0 FIELD METHODS ................................................................................................................................. 14
5.1 NAVIGATION AND REQUIRED PERSONNEL ...................................................................... 14
5.2 SEDIMENT AND INFAUNAL SAMPLING .............................................................................. 14
6.0 DATA PROCESSING AND LABORATORY METHODS ........................................................................... 16
6.1 CHEMICAL AND GEOLOGICAL ANALYSES ....................................................................... 16
6.2 INFAUNA .................................................................................................................................... 16
7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE ......................................................................................................................... 19
7.1 QUALITY CONTROL................................................................................................................. 19
7.2 SAMPLE HANDLING AND TRANSPORT .............................................................................. 20
7.3 DOCUMENT AND DATA SECURITY ..................................................................................... 20
7.4 DATA AND DOCUMENT REVIEW ......................................................................................... 20
8.0 REPORTING.......................................................................................................................................... 21
9.0 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 22
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................... 23
Appendix A: Relative CSA Project Experience ............................................................................... A-1
Appendix B: Key Personnel Resumes .............................................................................................. B-1
Tamar Field and Pipeline Survey, Scope of Work/Sampling and Analysis Plan
ii
March 2013
A-4
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1
Sediment sampling parameters/analytes ................................................................................. 6
2
Processing and storage requirements for sediment geological and chemical
sampling parameters ............................................................................................................... 6
3
Processing and storage requirements for water samples ......................................................... 7
4
Sampling along the Tamar pipeline routes and in the field .................................................... 8
5
EcoAnalysts’ taxonomists and their specialties .................................................................... 13
6
Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, and reporting/limits of
quantification for seawater samples ...................................................................................... 17
7
Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, reporting/limits of
quantification, sediment quality guidelines for sediment samples, and analytical
laboratory .............................................................................................................................. 18
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
1
Location of the Tamar Field and Pipelines relative to the Israeli coastline ............................ 5
2
Locations of the sediment sampling stations in the Tamar Field and the pipeline
routes....................................................................................................................................... 9
iii
March 2013
A-5
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1
BACKGROUND
Noble Energy Mediterranean, Ltd. (Noble Energy) has constructed a subsea gas production and
transportation system connecting the deepwater Tamar Gas Field to the Tamar Offshore Receiving and
Processing Platform (Tamar Platform). The components of the Tamar Development are shown in
Figure 1. The Tamar Field is located in License 309, Matan Block, approximately 90 km west of Haifa,
within the Levantine Basin. The Tamar Gas Field was developed as a subsea tieback to the Tamar
Platform, which is located within 2 km of the existing Mari-B Platform. The Tamar and Mari-B
Platforms are located approximately 25 km off the coast of Israel at a water depth of approximately
230 m. The processed gas will be delivered from the Tamar Platform to the Ashdod Onshore Terminal
(AOT) via hot tap into the existing 30-in. pipeline for gas sales into the Israel Natural Gas Line (INGL)
system.
The Ministry of Energy and Water Resources (MEWR) has required Noble Energy to develop and
implement a survey of the field and pipeline routes to characterize the environment. These data will also
be useful for assessing impacts should an accidental event occur in the field or along the pipeline routes.
Noble Energy has engaged CSA Ocean Sciences (CSA) to provide support in developing the Scope of
Work (SOW) and a Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) for this environmental survey. This document,
the SOW/SAP, describes the parameters to be sampled, sampling methods, data processing and laboratory
methods, and data analysis/reporting.
1.2
PURPOSE
The purpose of this environmental survey effort is to characterize the environmental conditions in the
Tamar Field and along the pipeline routes leading from the field to the production platform and from the
platform to the Ashdod terminal. The characterization of environmental conditions will consist of
determining the spatial variation of selected environmental components (i.e., chemical, geological, and
biological) in sediments within the study area. Three near bottom water samples will also be collected in
the Tamar Field and analyzed for a set of chemical analytes.
4
March 2013
A-6
2.0 SURVEY COMPONENTS
The field survey will involve sediment sampling and subsequent analysis for geological, chemical, and
biological parameters. Sampling at a station will consist of collecting three 25-cm × 25-cm box core
samples with a remotely operated vehicle (ROV). One of these box core samples will be subsampled for
analysis of the geological and chemical analytes. Two of the box core samples will be processed for
analysis of macroinfauna.
Water samples will be collected at three near bottom Field stations with clean GO-Flo water sample
bottles mounted on the ROV.
In addition, there will be a small quantity of videographic data of the seafloor recorded by the ROV
camera during sampling operations with the box cores.
The parameters to be sampled at each sediment sampling station and the sampling methods are listed in
Table 1. The processing and storage parameters for the sediment geological/chemical analytes are
provided in Table 2. Table 3 lists the water analytes to be sampled and their processing and storage
requirements.
Table 1. Sediment sampling parameters/analytes.
Analyte
Recommended Procedure
ROV box core sample; collect in pre-cleaned plastic container;
freeze
ROV box core sample; collect in pre-cleaned plastic container;
freeze
Grain size distribution by particle size analysis
TOC
Metals (Ag, Al, As, Ba, Be, Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Ni, Pb, Sb, Se,
Tl, V, and Zn)
TPH/Alkanes
PAH
Ra 226/228; Th 228*
Infauna
ROV box core sample; collect in pre-cleaned plastic; freeze
Use glass container with Teflon lined caps; freeze
Use glass container with Teflon lined caps; freeze
ROV box core sample; collect in pre-cleaned plastic; freeze
Two ROV box cores; sieve; fix with formalin; identification
and enumeration
Ag = silver; Al = aluminum; As = arsenic; Ba = barium; Be = beryllium; Cd = cadmium; Cr = chromium; Cu = copper; Fe = iron;
Hg = mercury; Ni= nickel; Pb = lead; Ra = radium; SB = antimony; Se = selenium; Th = thorium; V =Vanadium; Zn = zinc.
*Sampled only at the Tamar Field Stations.
Table 2. Processing and storage requirements for sediment geological and chemical sampling
parameters.
Minimum Sample
Weight
Particle size distribution;
TOC
200 g (wet)
Metals
150 g
Hydrocarbons
(TPH/alkanes and PAHs)
150 g
Ra 226/228; Th 228
500 g (wet)
Container Type
and Size
250-mL
wide-mouth plastic jar
250-mL
125-mL
wide-mouth glass jar
500-mL
Storage Conditions and/or
Preservation Method
store frozen
store frozen
store frozen
store frozen
Holding Time
Indefinite when
frozen
Indefinite when
frozen
28 d
N/A
N/A = not applicable (half-life based); PAHs = polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; Ra = Radium; Th = Thorium; TOC = total
organic carbon.
6
March 2013
A-8
Table 3. Processing and storage requirements for water samples.
Parameter/
Analyte(s)
Nutrients (TN/TP)
Total suspended
solids
Hydrocarbons
(TPH/alkanes and
PAHs)
Minimum
Sample Volume
Container Type
and Size
250 mL
250-mL HDPE
plastic bottle
1L
unfiltered
1-L plastic bottle
1L
1-L amber glass bottle
Cool to 4°C; ship on ice
500-mL narrow-mouth
glass
250-mL narrow-mouth
plastic
(2) 4-L
narrow-mouth plastic
H2NO3 to pH <2; cool to 4°C;
ship on ice
H2NO3 to pH <2; cool to 4°C;
ship on ice
H2NO3 to pH <2; cool to 4°C; ship
on ice
Hg
500 mL
Metals* other than
Hg
250 mL
Radium 226/228
8L
Handling, Storage Conditions,
and/or Preservation Method
Frozen
Cool to 4°C; filter in the field and
store pre-weighed filter frozen;
ship on ice
Holding Time
28 d
Indefinite when
filtered and frozen
7d
28 d
6 mo
N/A
HDPE = High-density polyethylene; Hg = mercury; N/A = not applicable (isotope half-life based); PAHs = polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons; TN = total nitrogen; TP = total phosphorus. * Ag (silver), As (arsenic), Ba (barium), Be (beryllium),
Cd (cadmium), Cr (chromium), Cu (copper), Ni (nickel), Pb (lead), Sb (antimony), Se (selenium), V (vanadium), and Zn (zinc).
7
March 2013
A-9
3.0 STATION CONFIGURATION
Sampling stations will be located in two stratified random sampling designs. This sampling design was
selected because it avoids potential pseudo-replication (sensu Hurlbert, 1984) and provides representative
samples for characterization of the environment in the study area. These designs correspond to
environmental characterization of the Tamar Field and environmental characterization of the two pipeline
routes.
For the Tamar Field, there are three geographic strata, and three sampling stations are randomly located
within each of these strata (Figure 2). For the pipeline routes, sampling will be divided among strata that
are defined based on water depth, and station locations will be randomly located within each stratum.
This sampling effort is summarized in Table 4 and depicted in Figure 2. A total of 28 stations will be
sampled. One near bottom water sample will be collected within each of the three Field strata by
randomly selecting one of the three sediment stations that are in each of the strata.
Table 4. Sampling along the Tamar pipeline routes and in the field.
Stratum
Between Tamar platform and AOT (sediment)
Between Tamar platform and 300-m isobaths (sediment)
Between 300-m to 900-m isobaths (sediment)
Between 900- and 1,400 m isobaths (sediment)
Between 1,400-m isobaths and the manifold in the Tamar Field
(sediment)
Tamar Field 3 strata x 3 stations (sediment)
Tamar Field 3 strata x 1 station (water )
Number of Sampling Stations
5
4
4
3
3
9
3
8
March 2013
A-10
4.0 PROJECT TEAM AND CORPORATE QUALIFICATIONS
CSA and its science and operations personnel have decades of experience conducting environmental
surveys in the U.S. and abroad. CSA is very familiar with using scientifically defensible, logistically
efficient, and field-proven approaches, methods, and technologies for environmental monitoring of
offshore oil and gas facilities. Our ability to mobilize and execute field programs, coupled with scientific
rigor, is well recognized in the oil and gas industry. The hundreds of projects with sample and data
collection components in the U.S. and other countries that CSA has conducted for numerous clients are a
testament to our expertise and competence. CSA has or is currently providing environmental services to
Noble Energy in various geographic areas, including Israel, Cyprus, Nicaragua, and the Gulf of Mexico.
Selected examples of CSA’s environmental monitoring and related experience are provided in
Appendix A.
As the prime contractor, CSA will be responsible for coordinating the efforts of all subcontractors and
producing the project report suitable for submission to the appropriate Ministries. CSA scientists will be
responsible for QC of all collected data and information and will prepare the final report and deliverables.
CSA’s extensive corporate and individual staff experience with offshore environmental monitoring
survey and management will ensure collection of scientifically defensible samples and data.
4.1
KEY PERSONNEL
CSA has assembled a well-qualified team to implement the monitoring program. The project team was
specifically brought together because of their knowledge, expertise, and experience conducting similar
projects, as well as a wide range of additional projects employing their assigned technical field of
expertise. Resumes for CSA’s key personnel on its project team are provided in Appendix B.
Dr. Yossi Azov of CSA Ocean Sciences, an expert on the environmental impacts, will be the Project
Manager. Dr. Azov will be responsible for technical execution and oversight of the work. Bruce
Graham, a CSA Senior Scientist and marine specialist with extensive experience conducting similar
projects, will be the lead benthic ecologist and will assist Dr. Azov in the program management. Dr. Luis
Lagera, Jr., an environmental scientist, will provide expertise in water quality and quality assurance
aspects of the monitoring program and be responsible for developing the water and sediment quality
sections of the report. Dr. Lagera has more than 20 years of experience conducting environmental
projects, including the monitoring of offshore platforms. Mr. Graham and Mr. Stephen Viada, both
benthic ecologists, and Mr. David Snyder, a specialist on fish and other nekton, will provide the expertise
in their fields and develop the biological sections of the report. Each scientist has at least 25 years of
experience in their respective fields. The field survey team will be led by Mr. Viada or Dr. Chris Kelly.
Dr. Kelly, a marine ecologist, will be primarily responsible for preparing the report with contributions
from other project team members. Dr. Alan Hart, CSA Science Director, has over 30 years of experience
and provides additional expertise as a biological oceanographer to the project team. He will work with
Dr. Kelly on statistical analysis of the survey data and provide scientific and technical review of the
survey report. Dr. David Gettleson will provide expert technical review of the report.
4.2
LABORATORIES
The primary analytical laboratories selected for this program are Weatherford Laboratories (WL), TAMI
IMI Institute for Research and Development (TAMI), Geological Survey of Israel (GSI), TDI-Brooks
International (TDI-Brooks), ALS Environmental (ALS), Chesapeake Biological Laboratory (CBL), and
EcoAnalysts, Inc. (EcoAnalysts).
10
March 2013
A-12
WL in Houston, Texas, will conduct the sediment particle size and total organic carbon analyses on
sediment samples. TAMI IMI (Israel) will analyze the sediment samples for metals except mercury (Hg).
GSI (Israel) will conduct the Hg analyses on the sediment samples and analyze the water samples for
metals. TDI-Brooks will be used for primary analyses of sediment and water hydrocarbon samples.
ALS’s analytical laboratory, located in Fort Collins, Colorado, will conduct the radioactivity analyses.
CBL will analyze the water samples for nutrients and total suspended solids. EcoAnalysts, located in the
U.S., will conduct the infaunal taxonomic identification.
The quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) laboratories selected for this program are TAMI IMI and
ALS‐Kelso, Washington, U.S. TAMI will be used as the QA/QC lab for hydrocarbons. ALS‐Kelso will
be used as the QA/QC lab for metal analyses of sediment.
4.2.1
Weatherford Laboratories
WL is a long-established geochemical service laboratory with extensive experience supporting the oil and
gas industry, universities, consultants, and consortiums. WL offers laboratory services at 14 locations in
North America, 6 locations in Latin America, 6 locations in Asia/Pacific Rim, 6 locations in the Middle
East/North Africa, and 5 locations in Europe. WL combines a global team of geoscientists, engineers,
technicians, and researchers with the industry’s most comprehensive, integrated laboratory services
worldwide.
4.2.2
TAMI IMI Institute for Research and Development
TAMI IMI, the corporate research and development center of Israel Chemicals, Ltd. (ICL), is very
experienced in the analysis of seawater, sediment, and tissue samples for the parameters of this program.
TAMI IMI's site in Deshanim Road, Kiryat Ata, Haifa, Israel, has up-to-date analytical laboratories
equipped with the state-of-the art instrumentation, such as 500-MHz nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR),
high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC), mass spectrometry (MS), gas chromatography, inductively
coupled plasma (ICP) MS, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) instrumentation, among others.
TAMI IMI operates under a comprehensive QA program and has certification under ISO 9001:2000,
ISO 14001, ISO/IEC 17025:2005, and SI OHSAS 18001. Analytical, testing, and pilot manufacturing
services are performed in laboratories certified in Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) and Good
Manufacturing Practice (GMP).
4.2.3
Geological Survey of Israel
The GSI was founded in 1949 and is a government institute operating under the Earth Science Research
Administration within the Ministry of National Infrastructures. This agency is involved in earth science
research and development in the broadest senses, adapting itself to the changing needs of a small and
dynamic country. The objectives of the GSI are to 1) document, study, and conduct research in all
aspects of the country's geology; 2) act as an advisory body to all government branches and major public
and private enterprises; 3) maintain a national and regional earth sciences data base; and 4) maintain an
analytical infrastructure.
The GSI Geochemical Laboratories provides analytical services to external agencies. An ICP-MS
Multi-Collector was recently been installed at the laboratory, increasing the existing instrumentation
consisting of an ICP-AES, ICP-MS, and stable isotope analytical facilities, which have been in operation
for some time. These together form a substantial analytical capability to analyzed geochemical samples.
11
March 2013
A-13
4.2.3
TDI-Brooks/B&B Laboratories
TDI-Brooks owns B&B Laboratories, a state-of-the-art laboratory facility in College Station, Texas.
B&B Laboratories has state-of-the-art equipment and an accomplished staff with a broad range of
published expertise in geo-chemistry and environmental chemistry. They specialize in the analysis of
organics, including petroleum hydrocarbons, with extensive experience in analysis of seawater and
marine sediments. B&B Laboratories operates a Quality Management System that complies with the
requirements of ISO 9001:2008 for the analysis of geochemical, geotechnical, and environmental
samples. They have certification validating that all our analytical processes are fully established,
functional, and meet international standards. B&B Laboratories has participated in the highly rigorous
U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) intercalibration exercise for trace organics
since 1997 and has always ranked in the top group for this exercise.
4.2.4
ALS Environmental
ALS is one of the world’s largest and most diversified testing services providers. ALS provides
sophisticated, modern analytical services specific to the minerals (i.e., geo-chemistry), life sciences
(i.e., environmental), and energy (i.e., oil and gas) industries. Over 20 million samples per year are
analyzed by ALS’s staff of 13,000 in 350 locations in 55 countries around the world. ALS has teams of
experts around the world available to provide specialized business solutions that align with client needs.
Major hub facilities are located in Australia, Asia, North America, South America, Europe, the Middle
East, and Africa.
Fort Collins, Colorado, United States
ALS – Fort Collins is a premier radiochemistry and environmental laboratory that serves the
U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of Defense, and well as numerous environmental
engineering and consulting firms and the private industry. ALS – Fort Collins performs a full range of
organic, inorganic, and radiochemical analyses and holds a current Radioactive Materials Handling
License from the U.S. State of Colorado. ALS – Fort Collins also has 18 other U.S. state accreditations.
Kelso, Washington, United States
ALS – Kelso is a National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) accredited
contract laboratory with extensive experience in the analysis of seawater and marine sediments. ALS –
Kelso has approximately 57,500 square feet of laboratory and support staff space with highly trained
personnel providing enhanced testing services. Specialized procedures at ALS – Kelso include the
ultra-trace determination of analytes in difficult sample matrices, including marine soil, water samples,
and tissue.
4.2.5 Chesapeake Biological Laboratory
CBL’s Nutrient Analytical Services Laboratory provides a wide range of water quality analyses on
state-of-the-art instrumentation while following strict QA/QC procedures. CBL provides services to
several U.S. governmental agencies (Environmental Protection Agency, Geological Survey, and Fish and
Wildlife Services), local regulatory agencies (Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Maryland
Department of the Environment), and many private environmental firms. CBL is a national leader in
environmental chemistry and toxicology and ecosystem science and restoration ecology.
12
March 2013
A-14
4.2.6
EcoAnalysts, Inc.
EcoAnalysts has a team of taxonomists comprising 10 taxonomists with 20 North American
Benthological Society certifications and over 190 years of combined taxonomy experience. Multiple
taxonomists working on a project increases the accuracy and repeatability of identifications. In addition
to their taxonomy capabilities, they employ 15 full-time professional sorting technicians, including
specially trained QC technicians. This allows EcoAnalysts to minimize the potential for introducing
sorting error in the bioassessment process. As the largest bioassessment laboratory in North America,
EcoAnalysts processes more than 6,000 benthic samples annually and has completed projects throughout
North America, as well as in Suriname, Peru, Brazil, Mexico, Dominican Republic, Australia, and India.
EcoAnalysts is currently performing the analysis of the infauna on the Noble Energy Mari-B/Tamar
Platforms project under a subcontract to CSA. EcoAnalysts serves Federal, State, and municipal
government agencies; environmental engineering and consulting firms; environmental law firms;
regulated industry clients; volunteer monitoring groups and watershed councils; universities; tribes; and a
variety of non-government organizations.
Table 5 lists the taxonomists who are anticipated to be working macroinfauna samples collected during
the environmental characterization survey.
Table 5. EcoAnalysts’ taxonomists and their specialties. All taxonomists listed have experience working
on deepwater marine benthic infauna and have worked on several projects from deepwater
Mediterranean Sea.
Taxonomist
Specialty
Pamela Neubert, Ph.D.
Aplacophorans
Chip Barrett, Ph.D.
Annelids
Zach Meier
Annelids
Isabelle Williams, M.S.
Angela Eagleston, BS
Crustaceans and Mollusks
Mollusks
Harlan Dean, M.S.
Miscellaneous Taxa,
Polychaetes
Matt Hill
Crustaceans and
Miscellaneous Taxa
Eugene Ruff, Ph.D.
Polychaetes
Subgroup
Years Experience
Neomeniomorpha and
17
Chaetodermomorpha
Marine Polychaetes, Oligochaetes and
20
Leeches
Polychaetes
5
Peracarid Crustaceans; Mollusca
45
Bivalves, Gastropods, Scaphopods
Bivalves, Gastropods, and
3
Aplacophorans
Nemerteans, Ophiuroids, Cnidaria,
Sipunculids, Echiurids, and Other
30
Polychaetes
Decapods, Peracarids, Other
Crustaceans, Nemerteans,
7
Echinoderms
Lumbrinerids, Terebellids, Sabellids,
35
Magalonids, Cirratulids
13
March 2013
A-15
5.0 FIELD METHODS
5.1
NAVIGATION AND REQUIRED PERSONNEL
Methods for accurate positioning will be used during the collection of survey data. A differential Global
Positioning System (DGPS) receiver is used for positioning the vessel. As appropriate, a computer
software and hardware package will interface various data collection sensors with a DGPS receiver. Prior
to survey mobilization, all sampling locations will be pre-plotted and stored in the navigation software
program. The actual positions of all collected samples will be recorded and stored by the navigational
software program. The standard geodesy for the environmental monitoring program will be UTM Zone
36N, WGS 1984 (with distances in meters).
The survey will involve 24-hr operations. CSA will provide six experienced personnel (two scientists and
four operations personnel) to conduct environmental monitoring survey operations. CSA personnel will
be augmented with Noble Energy’s contractors to provide navigators and supervisors as needed for 24-hr
operations. CSA personnel will prepare sampling equipment, direct data collection, conduct all aspects of
sample processing, and arrange for shipment or delivery of samples to respective laboratories. The
survey vessel will be mobilized with personnel and equipment in Haifa, Israel, or at another location
specified by Noble Energy.
5.2
WATER, SEDIMENT, AND INFAUNAL SAMPLING
Water sampling will be conducted at three Field stations. Seawater samples will be collected for the
analysis of nutrients (total nitrogen and phosphorus), total suspended solids, hydrocarbons (TPH/alkanes
and PAHs), metals, and radium 226/228. Water samples will be collected with clean GO-Flo water
sample bottles mounted on the ROV. Water samples will be transferred into pre-cleaned sample containers
and stored as recommended by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) protocols. Water
sample protocols are summarized in Table 3.
The ROV will deploy three stainless steel 25-cm × 25-cm box corers to collect sediment. Each box core
sample will be evaluated for acceptability on return to deck using standard U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (U.S EPA) sediment grab sampling criteria (U.S. EPA, 2001). These criteria include the
following:




No sediment touching the top of the sampler or overflowing from the sampler;
Clear, overlying water present in the sampler;
No sign of channelling or sample washout; and
No evidence of sediment loss.
One box core sample will be subsampled for sediment chemical and geological analyses. All chemical
and geological sub-samples will be collected from the top 2 cm of sediment with a pre-cleaned stainless
sampling spoon. Geological and chemical parameters will include grain size distribution by particle size
analysis (PSA), total organic carbon (TOC), metals, hydrocarbons (TPH, alkanes, and PAHs) and
radionuclides (Ra 226/228 and thorium 228 [Th 228]). Sediment samples will be transferred into
pre-cleaned sample containers, frozen, and handled/stored as recommended by U.S. EPA protocols.
Sediment sampling protocols are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
Two box core samples will be allocated for infauna. Samples for infauna analysis will be elutriated and
wet-sieved on board through a 0.25-mm mesh sieve with gentle streams of seawater using a flotation
14
March 2013
A-16
technique that minimizes trauma to the infaunal organisms and facilitates separation from the sediment.
Infaunal samples will be processed in the field using the overflow barrel technique, which is especially
useful for the very fine sediments expected at the deepwater sites. The sieved sample (containing infauna,
residual sediment, and debris) will be transferred to a sample container(s) and preserved using a
10% borax-buffered formalin solution. Appropriately sized sample jars will be labeled; the seams sealed
with electrical tape, then properly stored aboard the vessel.
15
March 2013
A-17
6.0 DATA PROCESSING AND LABORATORY METHODS
6.1
CHEMICAL AND GEOLOGICAL ANALYSES
Methods for analysis of seawater and sediment and corresponding detection limits, the chronic criteria
concentrations (CCC) for water, and effects range low/median (ERL and ERM) for sediments are
summarized in Tables 6 and 7. The CCC is U.S. EPA national recommended water quality criteria for
the protection of aquatic life and human health. The CCC is an estimate of the highest concentration of a
material in water to which biota can be exposed indefinitely without resulting in an unacceptable effect.
The ERL and ERM values are sediment quality (metals and organics) guidelines developed (Long and
Morgan, 1990) for NOAA that were derived from bioassays and sampling of marine sediments.
Concentrations in marine sediments that are below the ERL values represent concentrations where
biological effects are rarely observed or predicted. Concentrations above the ERM values represent
concentrations where biological effects are generally or always observed.
6.2
INFAUNA
Infaunal specimens will be sorted, counted, and identified to the lowest practical identification level
(LPIL). As appropriate, specimens will be sent to taxonomic experts for identification. The infauna
samples will be transferred from the formalin preservative to denatured alcohol for archival. A voucher
collection of specimens will also be developed and provided to the National Archive of the Israel
Oceanographic and Limnological Research Center. Densities of taxonomic categories will be computed
based on count data, as appropriate. Various indices will be computed to describe the macrobenthic
infaunal assemblage, including Shannon-Weiner diversity, Pielou's evenness, and equitability based on
Simpson's diversity index. Summary statistics, including number of taxa, number of individuals, diversity
(H'), evenness (J), and species richness (D), will be calculated for each sampling station. The raw data
matrix will be converted into a Bray-Curtis similarity matrix. To determine which taxa will be most
responsible for driving patterns observed in the samples, similarity percentages (SIMPER) will be
performed (Clarke and Gorely, 2006). SIMPER determines the percentage contribution of each taxon to
the average dissimilarity between sample stations. A species/area curve (rarefaction) will be developed to
measure sampling adequacy.
16
March 2013
A-18
Table 6. Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, and reporting/limits of quantification
for seawater samples.
Parameter/Analyte
Nutrients (TN/TP)
Digestion/
Extraction
Method
N/A
Quantification
Limit1
CCC
Units
Colorimetric methods
0.1/0.01
--
mg/L
Total suspended solids
N/A
Analytical balance
0.01
--
mg/L
Antimony
N/A
ICP-MS
0.2
500p
µg/L
Arsenic
N/A
ICP-MS
7
36
µg/L
Barium
N/A
ICP-MS
0.2
200
µg/L
Beryllium
N/A
ICP-MS
0.5
--
µg/L
Cadmium
N/A
ICP-MS
0.1
8.8
µg/L
5
--
2
µg/L
Chromium
N/A
ICP-MS
Copper
N/A
ICP-MS
1
3.1
µg/L
Lead
N/A
ICP-MS
0.1
8.1
µg/L
Mercury
N/A
Based on EPA 1631E
0.01
0.94
µg/L
Nickel
N/A
ICP-MS
0.1
8.2
µg/L
Selenium
N/A
ICP-MS
7
71
µg/L
Silver
N/A
ICP-MS
0.5
--
µg/L
Thallium
N/A
ICP-MS
0.1
--
µg/L
Vanadium
N/A
ICP-MS
2
50
µg/L
Zinc
N/A
ICP-MS
U.S. EPA 1664/8100/
8015 GC-MS
U.S. EPA SW-846/8260/
GC-MS
High resolution gamma
spectrometry
High resolution gamma
spectrometry
2
81
µg/L
13.0/0.15
--
ug/L
1.4
--
ng/L
1
--
pCi/L
1
--
pCi/L
TPH/Alkanes
Hexane
Polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons
Hexane
Ra 226
N/A
Ra 228
N/A
Analytical
Laboratory
CBL
GSI
TDI
ALS
1
Limits of quantification are the detection limits for metals and reporting limit for alkanes and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
Chromium III = 27.4 µg/L; Chromium VI = 50 µg/L.
ALS = ALS International (Colorado, U.S.A.); CBL = Chesapeake Biological Laboratory; GSI = Geological Survey of Israel;
CCC = chronic criteria concentration; ICP-MS = inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry; N/A = not applicable;
Ra = radium; TDI = TDI-Brooks International (Texas, U.S.A.); TN = total nitrogen; TP = total phosphorus;
U.S. EPA = Environmental Protection Agency.
2
17
March 2013
A-19
Table 7. Analytical parameters, analysis methods, reporting units, reporting/limits of quantification,
sediment quality guidelines for sediment samples, and analytical laboratory.
Parameter/Analyte
Digestion/
Extraction
Method
Particle size
distribution
N/A
Total organic carbon
N/A
Quantification
Limit
ERL
ERM
Units
0.1
--
--
μm
5
--
--
ppm
2
--
--
ppm
Aluminum
HF digestiona
Laser diffraction
particle size analysis
Based on European Standard
Norm 1484
Based on ISO 11885
Antimony
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
2
Arsenic
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
3
8.2
70
ppm
Barium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
0.5
--
--
ppm
Beryllium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
--
--
ppm
Cadmium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
0.5
1.2
9.6
ppm
Chromium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
81
370
ppm
Copper
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
34
270
ppm
Iron
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
--
--
%
Lead
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
5
46.7
218
ppm
Nickel
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
20.9
51.6
ppm
Selenium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
--
--
ppm
Silver
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
1
3.7
ppm
Thallium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
--
--
ppm
Vanadium
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
--
--
ppm
Zinc
HF digestion
Based on ISO 11885
1
150
410
ppm
Mercury
HF digestion
0.01
0.15
0.71
ppm
Alkanes
Hexane
Based on ISO 11885
U.S. EPA
1664/8100/8015/GC-MS
U.S. EPA
1664/8100/8015/GC-MS
U.S. EPA Sw-846/8260/GCMS
High-resolution
gamma spectrometry
High-resolution
gamma spectrometry
0.003 – 0.02
--
--
ppm
1.4
--
Total petroleum
hydrocarbons
Polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs)
Hexane
Hexane
Ra 226/228
N/A
Th 226
N/A
Analytical
Laboratory
WL
0.04 – 0.342
ppm
-b
ppm
TAMI
GSI
TDI
b
552b
3160
4,002c 44,792c
ppb
1
--
--
pCi/L
0.2
--
--
pCi/L
ALS
a
This digestion procedure results in the release of nearly all the metal content of a sample and it is believed to be a more accurate
estimate of the metal concentrations in all sample matrices.
b
PAHs = Low molecular weight.
c
Total PAHs.
ALS = ALS International (Colorado, U.S.A.); ERL = effects range-low; ERM = effects range-median; GSI = Geological Survey
of Israel; HF = hydrofluoric acid; TAMI = TAMI IMI Institute for Research and Development (Israel); of Israel;
TDI = TDI-Brooks International (Texas, U.S.A.); U.S. EPA = U.S. Environmental Protections Agency; WL = Weatherford
Laboratories.
18
March 2013
A-20
7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE
A QA program is undertaken to ensure that the project generates scientifically defensible data of known
quality that meet the project objectives. In addition to the QC measures described below, QA is furthered
by the selection of a qualified analytical laboratory, deployment of an experienced field team, and
detailed preparation during mobilization.
The analytical laboratories have established QA programs and have extensive experience in the analyses
of samples of marine sediments.
Field Personnel
Well-qualified and highly experienced CSA staff will comprise the field survey team. The use of
experienced staff who follow appropriate precautions and give careful attention to detail when conducting
the field surveys minimizes error, enhances quality, and maximizes efficiency in conducting the survey on
a 24-hr basis. Field team members will work in 12-hr shifts and provide a briefing and notes to personnel
on the next shift to ensure continuity.
Mobilization
Prior to the survey, the SOW/SAP will be reviewed by the project team to ensure that the field survey will
be conducted according to the approved scope. Requirements for containers, chemicals, and other field
supplies, field methods and procedures, sample identification labels, checklists, chain-of-custody (CoC),
sample disposition and shipping arrangements, and QC measures will be assessed. Responsibilities and
action items are assigned to field team members as appropriate. A mobilization item list will be prepared
by the Chief Scientist and Mobilization Manager and reviewed by the Project Manager for accuracy and
completeness.
7.1
QUALITY CONTROL
The typical QC measures observed by CSA during the conduct of projects include the preparation of
equipment blanks (rinsates) to determine the potential of contamination of samples by the sampling
equipment; preparation of field blanks to determine the potential of sample contamination from containers
and general sample handling; preparation and completion of sample/data checklists; equipment
performance and data checks; use of CoC processes; reference materials for laboratory analyses; and use of
qualified/certified equipment, personnel, and laboratories. QC samples (e.g., homogenized splits and
blanks) are prepared for selected water and sediment chemistry parameters, particularly those subject to
potential environmental contamination.
For this project, field QC will include equipment blanks, field blanks, sample/data checklists, and data
checks. Adequate volume of all blanks will be placed in the same sample containers as the primary
samples and clearly labeled for each analysis, along with the time, date, and location. Post-survey
shipment and sample tracking will ensure delivery of samples to designated laboratories within the
recommended holding times and condition.
Equipment Blanks
After the sampling equipment is cleaned, an equipment blank will be prepared by pouring deionized water
through the equipment and collecting the rinsate in a pre-cleaned sample container bottle that will be
labeled and shipped to the laboratory in the same fashion as the other samples.
19
March 2013
A-21
Field Blanks
Field blanks will be prepared by pouring analyte-free deionized water into clean sample containers while
in the field.
Data and Sample Collection Checklists
Prior to the survey, data and sample checklists will be prepared by the Chief Scientist and completed in
the field as appropriate for QC. Prior to departing each sampling station, the Chief Scientist or his
designee will review the checklist and physically examine and confirm data files, log books, and sample
containers to ensure the data and samples required at the station were collected and properly stored.
Sample Preservation and Holding Times
Samples will be preserved as specified by applicable regulations or industry practice and transported to
the laboratories for analysis under appropriate preservation and handling conditions.
7.2
SAMPLE HANDLING AND TRANSPORT
After sample collection, proper sample handling protocols will be followed to ensure that valid results are
obtained from the analysis of each sample.
All samples will be transported or shipped under a CoC process. Proper CoC will be maintained for all
samples, and a CoC record will accompany all samples. Each person involved with the custody of the
sample(s) is responsible for signing the appropriate forms and ensuring that the samples are properly
handled, stored, transported, and/or analyzed. Each sample will have a unique identifier that can be
directly tracked to the field logbook or data sheets. Labels will be waterproof or covered with clear tape
and securely fastened to the container. Labels will also contain information concerning date and time of
collection, preservation information, and the person responsible for sample collection. Shipping
containers will need to be adequate to protect the sample containers and avoid breakage. Containers will
be secured to be leak proof, avoid cross-contamination, and prevent sample loss during shipment.
Samples will be shipped to the appropriate laboratory for analysis as soon as possible after collection.
Sample analysis requests/instructions will be prepared by the Chief Scientist to accompany or be sent
separately for all samples shipped to the laboratory. Transport and shipping will be coordinated to ensure
strict compliance with sample-holding times. The Chief Scientist or his designee needs to ensure and
confirm by telephone, fax, or e-mail that all samples are delivered and logged in good condition at each
designated laboratory.
7.3
DOCUMENT AND DATA SECURITY
Navigation and positioning data will be saved to a computer file and backed up on a separate, removable
medium (e.g., backup computer, flash memory/data stick, or DVD/CD-R/RW). Backup media will be
stored and transported separately from the field computer. Upon return to Stuart, Florida, the Chief
Scientist will ensure that all data are properly backed up and/or archived on CSA’s local area network file
server or other appropriate alternative.
7.4
DATA AND DOCUMENT REVIEW
Data review and QC procedures will be implemented to ensure that sample and data collections from the
field, and analytical results from laboratories are accurate and accompanied by required metadata.
A CSA scientist with requisite experience and background will review all data sets prior to data analysis
and inclusion into the report. The draft report will be subject to in-house technical and editorial review
and copy proofing.
20
March 2013
A-22
8.0 REPORTING
The Report will present data to document the physical, chemical, geological, and biological conditions
within the survey area. The report will generally follow Section 10 (Guidelines for Writing a Summary
Report) of the MEWR and Ministry of Environmental Protection (MoEP) Appendix A1 “Guidelines for
Marine Monitoring for the Purpose of Studying the Effects of Oil and Gas and Oil Exploration Activities
on the Marine Environment in the State of Israel”. It will describe methods and QC procedures utilized
during sample collection and laboratory analyses. The report will include maps, figures, and other
illustrations referencing the sample locations as well as the analytical results. The report will be submitted to
Noble Energy for submittal to the MEWR in five hard copies and electronically. The report submittal
date is anticipated to be approximately 4 months following completion of the environmental survey. A
supplemental report with more complete taxonomic identifications of the infauna will be submitted within
7 months of the completion of the survey.
21
March 2013
A-23
9.0 REFERENCES
Clarke, K.R. and R.N. Gorley. 2006. PRIMER v6. Primer-E Ltd., Plymouth, UK.
Hurlbert, S.H. 1984. Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments. Ecological
Monographs 54(2):187-211.
Long, E.R. and L.G. Morgan. 1990. The potential for biological effects of sediment-sorbed contaminants
tested in the National Status and Trends Program. NOAA Tech. Memo. NOS OMA 52.
U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Seattle, WA. 175 pp.
U.S. EPA. 2001. Methods for collection, storage and manipulation of sediments for chemical and
toxicological analysis. EPA-823-B-01-002. Office of Water, Washington, DC, USA.
22
March 2013
A-24
APPENDICES
23
March 2013
A-25
APPENDIX A
SELECTED RELEVANT CSA PROJECT EXPERIENCE
A-1
March 2013
A-26
U.S. PROJECTS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (1992 to 1997)
CSA conducted a multiyear study of the environmental impacts associated with produced water
discharges from oil and gas operations in the Gulf of Mexico and coastal Louisiana. CSA served as the
prime contractor for the study, managed a seven-company team of experts, and organized and coordinated
a Scientific Review Committee. The primary project goal was to increase the base of scientific
knowledge concerning 1) the characteristics of produced water and also produced sand discharges as they
pertain to organics, metals, and naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) variably found in
association with the discharges; 2) the fate of organics, metals, and NORM in water, sediment, and biota
near a number of offshore oil and gas production facilities; 3) the recovery of two terminated produced
water discharge sites located in open bay areas of coastal Louisiana; and 4) the catch, consumption, and
human use patterns of seafood species collected from coastal and offshore waters. A plan of study in the
form of a Field Plan (Sampling and Analysis Plan) was prepared. These data were used in an ecological
risk assessment for organics and metals that was performed under this contract. The data were also used
by Brookhaven National Laboratory for an ecological risk assessment for radionuclides and a human
health risk assessment for organics, metals, and radionuclides. The study also examined the economic
and energy supply impacts of existing and anticipated Federal and State offshore and coastal discharge
regulations.
OFFSHORE OPERATORS COMMITTEE (1994 to 1997)
CSA conducted the Gulf of Mexico Produced Water Bioaccumulation Study for the Offshore Operators
Committee (OOC). This industry-wide study was designed to replace many site-specific bioaccumulation
monitoring studies by individual operators to satisfy National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) Permit requirements by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region VI. The
program had two components: 1) the Definitive Component; and 2) the Platform Survey Component.
The two objectives of the Definitive Component were 1) to determine whether statistically significant
bioaccumulation of produced water related organics and inorganics occurs in the edible tissue of resident
fish and invertebrates in the immediate vicinity of representative Gulf of Mexico offshore platforms that
discharge more than 4,600 bbl/day of produced water; and 2) to evaluate the environmental significance
of any statistically significant increases observed due to produced water related bioaccumulation in edible
tissue. The Platform Survey Component collected additional data on the bioaccumulation of selected
chemical constituents in the edible tissue of marine organisms found in the immediate vicinity of a set of
offshore Gulf of Mexico platforms. CSA prepared Sampling and Analysis Plans prior to offshore
surveys, which were conducted during Fall 1994, Spring 1995, and Fall 1995. For the Definitive
Component, produced water, ambient water, and fish and invertebrate tissue samples were collected and
analyzed for volatile and semivolatile organic compounds, metals, and radionuclides. Only tissue
samples were collected and analyzed for the Platform Survey Component. Post Survey Reports and Data
Reports were submitted after each of the cruises. In addition to a Final Report for each component, a
Bioaccumulation Literature Review was prepared as a separate document for the Definitive Component.
CSA gave oral presentations of the study design and results to the OOC and EPA.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, SOUTHERN DIVISION, NAVAL FACILITIES
ENGINEERING COMMAND (2002 to 2003)
CSA provided numerous marine environmental services associated with increased Fleet training, support,
and infrastructure improvements at the Naval Air Facility in Key West, Florida. The proposed action
involved dredging in Truman Annex Harbor and the associated Turning Basin and Main Ship Channel,
along with subsequent dredged material disposal. CSA managed the marine biology, chemistry, bioassay,
and bioaccumulation aspects of the project and conducted the marine data analysis, synthesis, and
reporting of these aspects. CSA prepared the marine environmental sections of the Environmental
A-27
Assessment (EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), regulations on
implementing NEPA procedures from the Council on Environmental Quality and Department of the
Navy, and other related Acts, Executive Orders, and requirements. In addition to the EA, CSA prepared a
Biological Assessment in accordance with requirements of the Endangered Species Act. CSA also
prepared an Essential Fish Habitat Assessment as required by Final Rule provisions of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. CSA conducted a Tier I Evaluation
according to U.S. Army Corps of Engineer (USACE) Testing Manuals for dredged material management.
CSA prepared a Sampling and Analysis Plan and Quality Control Plan for CSA's Bathymetric Survey,
Biological Characterization Survey, Sediment and Water Quality Sampling Survey, and subcontractor
laboratory analyses. CSA also conducted these surveys. In addition, CSA prepared marine
environmental information for other project permits, including the National Marine Sanctuary General
Permit, Florida Environmental Resource Permit, Water Quality Certificate, Coastal Zone Consistency
Determination and Certificate, etc. CSA attended the Project Kickoff Meeting with the Navy and other
meetings with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Environmental Protection Agency,
National Marine Fisheries Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USACE, etc.
CSA was a subcontractor to CZR Incorporated.
MOBIL EXPLORATION & PRODUCING U.S. INC. (1994 to 1995)
CSA conducted a tiered monitoring program to satisfy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
requirements in Viosca Knoll Block 202. The monitoring was done to satisfy a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System permit stipulation for exploratory drilling in the block and to comply with
the Section 403(c) requirements of the Clean Water Act. The monitoring plan involved three tiers: Tier 1
– pre-drill and post-drill sediment chemistry surveys; Tier 2 – an infaunal community structure survey;
and Tier 3 – a bioaccumulation study. A plan of study in the form of a Sampling and Analysis Plan was
prepared. The pre-drill and post-drill Tier 1 sediment chemistry surveys were conducted at four stations.
Results of the post-drill survey were used to determine if significant changes in the levels of drill mud
components in the sediments had occurred. These elevations were found and the Tier 2 survey was
required. If significant changes in the benthic community structure had been detected and shown to
correlate with elevations in drill mud component levels during the Tier 2 survey, the Tier 3
bioaccumulation study would have been performed. Since the results of the Tier 2 survey did not show
correlated changes, the Tier 3 survey was not required or conducted. (Note: Bioaccumulation study was
not conducted for this project because it was determined it was not required.)
AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE (1991 to 1993)
CSA conducted a study of two platforms offshore of Louisiana to determine concentrations of
radioactivity in tissue, sediment, and water samples as caused by naturally occurring radioactive materials
(NORM). The study included analysis of samples from biofouling community organisms, benthic soft
substrate megafaunal community organisms, mid-water fish, produced water discharges, and sediments
for radionuclide content. Sediment samples were also analyzed for grain size. Current data as well as
water column salinity, temperature, depth, and dissolved oxygen data were also collected. A plan of
study was prepared in the form of a Sampling and Analysis Plan.
MID-CONTINENT OIL AND GAS ASSOCIATION (1989 to 1991)
CSA investigated levels of radium 226/228 in the vicinity of produced waters discharges at three
industrial facilities. Levels were measured in water, sediment, and tissues sampled near the discharge
canals. Water quality sampling was also conducted.
SOHIO PETROLEUM COMPANY (1985 to 1987)
CSA conducted an environmental monitoring program during the drilling of an exploratory well in
Gainesville Area Block 707 (eastern Gulf of Mexico). The primary purpose of the program was to
determine if the drilling operation affects the seagrass Halophila decipiens in the vicinity of the drillsite.
A-28
Program elements included seagrass and live bottom photography; surficial sediment and sediment trap
samples for barium, chromium, and iron; current meter and transmissometer data collection; and biota
collection to determine bioaccumulation of barium and chromium.
MOBIL PRODUCING TEXAS & NEW MEXICO INC. (1982 to 1986)
CSA conducted a comprehensive environmental monitoring program during the drilling of eight wells
from a production platform near the East Flower Garden Bank in the Gulf of Mexico. The program
included the collection and chemical analyses of surficial sediments, trapped sediments, and discharged
drilling muds for trace metals and high molecular weight hydrocarbons. The program also included
continuous recording of water current speed and direction at various depths; hydrographic profiles of
salinity, temperature, and dissolved oxygen; analyses of bivalves for bioaccumulation; and extensive
quantitative analyses of larval settling rates and lateral and vertical growth of hermatypic corals. In
addition, a damage assessment survey was performed following the observation of a vessel anchored in
the coral reef zone. A reassessment of the surveyed area was performed 2 years later to document
recovery.
UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA (1982 to 1983)
CSA conducted a comprehensive environmental monitoring program during the drilling of one
exploratory well near the West Flower Garden Bank in the Gulf of Mexico. The program included video
and still camera photographic documentation, collection and chemical analyses of surficial and trapped
sediments, analyses of discharged drilling fluids, hydrographic profiles, continuous water current data
recording, analyses of bivalves for bioaccumulation, and extensive quantitative analyses of growth of
hermatypic corals. Site clearance and anchor placement surveys were conducted using underwater video
and still photography.
A-29
INTERNATIONAL PROJECTS
SHELL CHEMICAL YABUCOA, INC. (2005 to 2008)
CSA conducted a 403(c) monitoring program related to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit for a discharge from the Shell Chemical Yabucoa, Inc. (SCY) refinery into
Yabucoa Bay, Puerto Rico. CSA also conducted three additional studies required by the Puerto Rico
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) under the NPDES permit. Prior to conducting the studies, a
Toxicity Testing Protocol and Metals Translator Study (MTS) Protocol prepared by CSA were reviewed
and approved by the EQB. The 403(c) Plan of Study, a Quality Assurance Project Plan required for the
403(c), and additional studies prepared under a previous project by CSA were approved by the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and EQB. The 403(c) monitoring program required by the EPA
consisted of two major elements: 1) whole effluent evaluation, which consisted of priority pollutant scans
and biotoxicity tests, on a quarterly basis; and 2) analysis of sediment quality and the benthic community,
which included the macroinfaunal community, coral reefs, and seagrass beds within Yabucoa Bay.
Composited (whole) effluent samples were collected quarterly for toxicity testing and priority pollutant
scans. Effluent samples also were to be annually tested for toxicity for a period of 3 years. A field survey
was conducted for sampling and analysis of sediment quality and the benthic community in the dry
season. Sediment sampling was performed at six stations in the vicinity of the ocean outfall and at three
reference stations. The macrobenthic communities, coral reefs, and seagrass beds adjacent to the ocean
outfall were surveyed. Quarterly toxicity testing reports were submitted to EPA. Annual reports detailing
the results of the quarterly whole effluent sampling and priority pollutant analysis and the benthic field
survey were prepared and submitted to the EPA and EQB. The Interim Mixing Zone Validation Study
(IMZVS) involved sampling ambient water at the mixing zone and effluent on a monthly basis for 1 year
and then yearly for 3 years thereafter. Hourly samples were collected over a 6-hour period, composited,
and the time-composited samples analyzed for metals and other parameters specified in the permit. The
MTS involved sampling ambient water at the mixing zone and effluent over 10 sampling events in 2005
to 2006 under stringent “Clean Hands” techniques and analyzing the samples for lead and copper with
low-level methods. A plan for each study was prepared in the form of Sampling and Analysis Plan. Postcruise field reports and preliminary data reports for the monthly IMZVS and MTS surveys were
submitted. Reports were prepared upon completion of the IMZVS and MTS and submitted to EQB.
Reports also were prepared for the annual Toxicity Testing and IMZVS surveys and submitted to EPA
and EQB, respectively. In addition, CSA assisted SCY in preparing a report addressing Special
Condition 23 of the permit and prepared responses to EPA on issues concerning selenium in the effluent.
CSA prepared a response to EPA’s determination that seagrass toxicity testing was required based on
Endangered Species Act consultations with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS). The response was instrumental in dissuading NMFS and FWS from
requiring SCY to conduct additional monitoring of seagrass communities in Yabucoa Bay.
BHP BILLITON (TRINIDAD 2-C) LIMITED (2009 to 2010)
CSA conducted a field sampling survey associated with produced water discharge in the nearshore
Guayaguayare Bay area off the southeast coast of Trinidad, Trinidad and Tobago, West Indies. Water
and sediment samples were collected for analyses of BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and
xylenes), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and radionuclides. A plan of study in the form of a
Sampling and Analysis Plan was prepared. A report was prepared to present the results of the surveys
and analyses and, where appropriate, compare those results with findings of other similar studies. This
project was conducted as a subcontract to CSA International, Inc, TT Branch.
A-30
CLIENT AND FACILITY CONFIDENTIAL
CSA was contracted to develop an ecological sampling program associated with the discharge of
produced water from a floating production, storage, and offloading (FPSO) facility in the South China
Sea. The sampling program included sampling and analysis of water, sediment, and fish tissues as well as
a description of the sampling design, field and laboratory methodologies, and quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) measures. A plan of study was prepared in the form of a Sampling and Analysis Plan.
CSA also purchased the necessary equipment and provided personnel to participate in the sampling cruise
to monitor QA/QC and train facility personnel. CSA prepared a baseline survey report and two quarterly
monitoring reports that included an interpretation of the laboratory analyses.
MAXUS SOUTHEAST SUMATRA, INC. (1996 to 1997)
CSA managed three subcontractors and provided data and consultation for an Effluent Discharge Impact
modeling effort of the acute and chronic (bioaccumulation) toxicity of produced water discharges on fish
and zooplankton in Indonesia. The data consisted of 96-hour LC50 toxicity testing on two produced water
samples. The tests were performed on non-aged and aged or biodegraded produced water samples with
Mysidopsis bahia (brine shrimp) and Menidia beryllina (silverside fish). Samples of non-aged and aged
produced waters were analyzed for an extensive number of organic compounds. Uptake of nonylphenol
by Mysidopsis was also determined from 14C. Guidance on the incorporation of these results and other
data into the model was provided as well as suggestions on how to model biological uptake of the
produced water constituents. This project was conducted as a subcontract to P.T. Environmental
Indonesia.
TULLOW GHANA LIMITED (2010 to 2011)
CSA completed a study to assess the impacts of drill cuttings and associated non-aqueous drilling fluids
on benthic and pelagic systems located in the Jubilee Field, Ghana. Two primary tasks were completed,
including 1) preparing a literature review summarizing the scientific and grey literature on drill cuttings
discharge and related impacts as well as regulatory limits and accepted monitoring practices worldwide;
and 2) conducting an OSPAR-compliant field survey to assess the impact of drill cuttings discharges on
the marine environment in the Jubilee Project area, verifying modeling undertaken to date and
documenting the potential recovery of affected sites. A plan of study was prepared in the form of a Field
Plan (Sampling and Analysis Plan). The field survey involved collecting seawater, sediment, infauna, and
sediment profile imaging data in deepwater in close proximity to existing subsea facilities. Seawater and
sediment sample analyses were conducted by U.S. laboratories. Infauna were analyzed by a local
laboratory. CSA also prepared a Final Report for submission to the Ghana EPA on drill cuttings impacts
in the Jubilee Project area. The report placed the observed impacts into context and included
recommendations for National Discharge guidelines of oil on cuttings concentrations based on the
literature review and field survey results.
A-31
APPENDIX B
KEY PERSONNEL RESUMES
B-1
March 2013
A-32
BRUCE D. GRAHAM
Senior Scientist, Marine Specialist
Education
Master of Science in
Biological Sciences,
Florida Institute of
Technology, 1983
Bachelor of Science in
University of New
Hampshire at Durham,
1979
Exchange program,
California State
University at Chico,
1977 to 1978
Mr. Graham is a marine biologist with over 25 years experience in field studies of benthic
communities. He has served as Project Manager and/or Chief Scientist on numerous marine
programs, including habitat assessment and restoration, multidisciplinary baseline studies,
and environmental monitoring programs. He has prepared survey plans; supervised and
conducted sample collection, processing, and analysis; and has been responsible for the
interpretation and synthesis of data in conjunction with document preparation. He has been
responsible for the analyses of more than 10,000 photographs of hard and soft bottom
benthic communities collected in areas that include the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico,
Antigua, Sea of Okhotsk (Russia), Federated States of Micronesia, U.S. Virgin Islands, and
Taiwan.
Mr. Graham has extensive experience conducting environmental studies as a scientific diver.
His diving experience includes benthic still and video photography, in-situ identification of
epibiota, and in-field sample collection (e.g., biological and sediment chemistry).
Mr. Graham is a certified SCUBA and Nitrox specialty diver and is trained in Red Cross
cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and first aid. He has conducted studies worldwide and
participated as Senior Field Scientist in the environmental monitoring of the Exxon Valdez
remediation program. He has been Chief Scientist on damage assessment and habitat
restoration projects at vessel grounding sites off the east coast of Florida including Biscayne
National Park (BISC) and the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), Dry
Tortugas, Mississippi Sound, Hawaii, Antigua, Colombia, Federated States of Micronesia,
Mexico, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. He has developed and field-tested new
methods for reattaching and transplanting hard corals, soft corals, and sponges as a means of
accelerating habitat recovery.
Mr. Graham has authored several technical publications concerning zoogeography, various
restoration techniques including hard coral reattachment to accelerate marine habitat
recovery, oil and gas environmental monitoring, vessel grounding case studies, and
crustacean natural history. He co-authored and produced an interactive CD-ROM version of
the “Ecology of Live Bottom Habitats of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A Community
Profile” for the U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service (MMS).
Mr. Graham has co-authored grant proposals for successful procurement of funding from the
South Florida Water Management District and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission to develop and deploy artificial reefs in Martin County, Florida.
Mr. Graham has also conducted Habitat Equivalency Analyses (HEA) associated with
resource damage from natural gas pipeline installations and vessel groundings. Tasks
associated with HEA include selection and scaling of appropriate restoration/mitigation
options.
He has been qualified by the State of Florida to act as an expert witness in cases relating to
marine environmental science. Mr. Graham participated as an expert panel member for the
Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative workshop “Maritime Industry & Coastal
Construction Impacts” to develop guidelines for rapid response to and restoration of coral
reef injuries in southeast Florida.
A-33
BRUCE D. GRAHAM
REPRESENTATIVE EXPERIENCE
2006 to Present: CSA International, Inc.

Project Manager/Chief Scientist during damage assessment, restoration, and monitoring of the M/T
MARGARA grounding site offshore southwest Puerto Rico. Responsible for directing and conducting
natural resource damage process, including assessment, restoration, monitoring, and compensatory
scaling. Restoration included substrate stabilization and reattachment of over 11,000 corals. Program
included the development of a reattachment strategy to propagate staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis)
(Independent Maritime Consulting Ltd., 2006 to present).

Scientist during monitoring of fate and effects of drilling muds and cuttings discharges associated
with Qatar Block 13. Monitoring survey sampling included replicate sediment traps, diver-collected
sediment samples, and qualitative video/still photography. Sediment samples were analyzed for grain
size, trace metals, and total petroleum hydrocarbons. Monitoring data will be analyzed to determine the
distribution of discharged muds/cuttings and will provide ground-truthing for an Environmental Impact
Assessment model (Anadarko, 2006 to 2007).

Chief Scientist during nearshore survey of marine benthic habitats along the Ocean Express Natural
Gas Pipeline that extends from Freeport, Bahamas to Port Everglades, Florida. Survey objective was to
qualitatively and quantitatively characterize various benthic habitats to provide guidance in identifying a
preferred pipeline route that would minimize impact to benthic communities. Data obtained during the
survey define pre-construction baseline conditions of existing benthic habitats and will be utilized for
post-construction monitoring (Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., 2002 to 2003).

Project Manager and/or Chief Scientist on over 70 photodocumentation surveys in the Gulf of
Mexico, northwest Atlantic, and Russia. Supervised collection and analysis of samples and data,
document preparation, and report presentation (Various clients, 1983-2000).

Chief Scientist and Scientific Diver during survey to investigate potential bioaccumulation of
chemical components of produced water in biota near offshore oil and gas facilities in the northwest Gulf
of Mexico. Responsible for sample collection of water, and biota that included fish, macroinvertebrates,
and bivalves. Other responsibilities included sample processing, data analysis, project management, and
document preparation (Offshore Operators Committee, 1994-1997).
PUBLICATIONS
Graham, B.D., E. Hodel, and A. McCarthy. 2008. Coral Community Restoration following Vessel
Groundings in Broward County, Florida: A Review of Efforts and Future Needs. The 11th International
Coral Reef Symposium (Abstract). Mini-Symposium 24: Reef Restoration, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Kilbane, D.A., B.D. Graham, R.D. Mulcahy, A. Onder, and M. Pratt. 2008. Coral Relocation for Impact
Mitigation in Northern Qatar. The 11th International Coral Reef Symposium (Abstract).
Mini-Symposium 24: Reef Restoration, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Moore, T., B.D. Graham, S. Griffin, K. Kirsch, C. Lilyestrom, and M. Nemeth. 2008. Restoration of
Acropora cervicornis at the site of the M/T MARGARA Grounding. The 11th International Coral Reef
Symposium (Abstract). Mini-Symposium 24: Reef Restoration, Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Graham, B.D. and R.D. Mulcahy. 2003. Coral Reef Injuries and Relevant Case Studies: Management
Tool for Directing Restoration. MarCuba 6th Congress on Marine Sciences (Abstract). Havana, Cuba.
Tilmant, J., L. Canzanelli, R. Clark, R. Curry, B.D. Graham, M. Mayr, A. Moulding, R.D. Mulcahy,
S. Viehman, and T. Whittington. 2003. Restoration of Coral Reef Habitats within the National Park
System. 2003 Biennial Conference of the George Wright Society. San Diego, CA.
A-34
BRUCE D. GRAHAM
Turner, R.L. and B.D. Graham. 2000. New Records of Echinoderms from the Gulf of Mexico. The 64th
Annual Meeting of the Florida Academy of Sciences (Abstract). Melbourne, FL.
Graham, B.D. and P. Fitzgerald. 1999. New Technique for Hard Coral Reattachment - Field Tested
Following Two Recent Ship Groundings. International Conference on Scientific Aspects of Coral Reef
Assessment, Monitoring, and Restoration (Abstract). Fort Lauderdale, FL.
Thompson, M.J., W.W. Schroeder, N.W. Phillips, and B.D. Graham. 1999. Ecology of Live Bottom
Habitats of the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico: A Community Profile. U.S. Department of the Interior,
U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Resources Division, USGS/BRD/CR-1999-0001 and Minerals
Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA, OCS Study MMS 99-0004.
Gettleson, D.G., A.D. Hart, K.D. Spring, and B.D. Graham. 1998. Baseline Environmental Surveys of
the Piltun-Astokhskoye Field, Offshore Sakhalin Island, Russia. 1998 American Association of
Petroleum Geologists Annual Convention (Abstract).
Graham, B.D. and M. Schroeder. 1996. M/V FIRAT Removal, Grounding Assessment, Hard Coral
Reattachment, and Monitoring - A Case Study, pp. 1,451-1,455. In: Oceans 96 MTS/IEEE Conference
Proceedings. The Coastal Ocean - Prospects for the 21st Century. 23-26 September 1996, Fort
Lauderdale, FL.
Jaap, W., B.D. Graham, and G. Mauseth. 1996. Reattaching Corals Using Epoxy Cement.
8th International Coral Reef Symposium (Abstract).
Jaap, W., B.D. Graham, and G. Mauseth. 1995. FIRAT Grounding Assessment and Coral Reattachment
Project. International Estuarine Research Federation (Abstract).
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, D.A. Gettleson, D.L. Demorest, and B.W. Smith. Naturally Occurring
Radioactive Materials Associated with Offshore Produced Water Discharges in the Gulf of Mexico.
A presentation at the 1995 International Produced Water Seminar sponsored by STATOIL Research and
Development, 25-28 September 1995, Trondheim, Norway.
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, and D.A. Gettleson. 1995. NORM Associated with Produced Water
Discharges. Society of Petroleum Engineers Publication 29727. Annual Meeting of the Society of
Petroleum Engineers. Society of Petroleum Engineers, Richardson, TX.
Gettleson, D.A., A.D. Hart, and B.D. Graham. 1994. Environmental and Economic Assessment of
Discharges from Gulf of Mexico Region Oil and Gas Operations. U.S. Department of Energy (Abstract).
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, and D.A. Gettleson. 1993. Concentrations of Naturally Occurring Radioactive
Materials Associated with Produced Water Discharges from Production Platforms in the Northwestern
Gulf of Mexico. Presentation at the 14th Meeting of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry, Houston, TX.
Graham, B.D. and R.L. Turner. 1984. Nutrition of Ghost Crabs Fed Prey of Different Organic
Composition. Fla. Sci. 47:17-18 (Abstract).
Graham, B.D. 1983. The Effect of Diet on the Biochemical Composition of the Hepatopancreas of Male
Ocypode quadrata. M.S. thesis, Florida Institute of Technology. 50 pp.
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Open Water SCUBA Diver – National Association of Underwater Instructors (NAUI)
CPR – American Red Cross
Multi-media Standard First Aid – American Red Cross
Nitrox Specialty Diver – Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI)
A-35
Christopher J. Kelly, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist, Marine Ecologist
Education
Doctor of Philosophy,
Ecology, University of
Maryland, 2011
Bachelor of Science,
Biology (Marine
Biology and Ecology
Options), Florida
Institute of Technology,
2001
Dr. Kelly is a marine ecologist with over 10 years of experience in marine environmental
science. He has a strong background in linking the ecological processes of benthic and
pelagic systems, investigating the importance of habitat complexity on predator-prey
interactions, and examining how anthropogenic pressures affect benthic invertebrate and fish
predator communities.
As a Senior Scientist at CSA International, Inc. (CSA), he has served as a Chief Scientist on
several research cruises evaluating the impact of anthropogenic disturbance on deep-sea
benthic systems. He has been responsible for field collection, management, and analysis of
seawater, sediment, and infaunal samples. He has experience in designing and implementing
statistically rigorous observational and manipulative research studies. He regularly
coordinates fieldwork, supervises field staff in data collection, and prepares field survey
reports.
Prior to consulting, Dr. Kelly was a principal investigator as a Ph.D. graduate student in a
study researching the suitability of introducing the non-native suminoe (Crassostrea
ariakensis) oyster into Chesapeake Bay to help alleviate the problems associated with the
loss of native eastern (Crassostrea virginica) oyster biomass. This project was a
collaboration among several universities and local, State, and Federal government agencies.
His dissertation also included research on determining how complex aquatic habitats alter
predator-prey relationships within a tri-trophic food web.
September 2011 to Present: CSA International

Chief Scientist for three environmental surveys within the eastern Mediterranean Sea to assess
deep-sea benthic habitat prior to and after anthropogenic disturbances. Established permanent transects
for observation, sediment, and seawater collection using a remotely operated vehicle (ROV). Statistically
analyzed environmental data and collaborated on the writing of technical reports.
2004 to 2011: University of Maryland – Graduate Research Assistant

Investigated the importance of essential fish habitat (i.e. oyster reefs, corals, mangroves), and how
these structurally complex habitats affect both invertebrate prey and fish predator species through
attraction, enhanced secondary production, and the interactions between them.

Researched the suitability of the exotic suminoe oyster (Crassostrea ariakensis) for introduction into
Chesapeake Bay to help alleviate the loss of native eastern (Crassostrea virginica) oyster biomass.

Examined seasonal physiological differences of the suminoe and eastern oyster under temperate
mesohaline and sub-tropical polyhaline regions.
2001 to 2003: U.S. Peace Corps, Zambia – Rural Aquaculture / Fisheries Extension Agent

Developed a sustainable fishery in Northwestern Province, Zambia. Trained rural farmers how to
construct and maintain Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) ponds using only locally available materials.

Collaborated with fish farmer associations within Northwestern Province, Zambia to develop market
strategies to optimize selling price for fishery products.
A-36
Christopher J. Kelly, Ph.D.
PUBLICATIONS (Peer-Reviewed)
Kelly, C.J., S.E. Laramore, J. Scarpa, and R.I.E. Newell. 2011. Seasonal comparison of physiological
adaptation and growth of Suminoe (Crassostrea ariakensis) and eastern (Crassostrea virginica) oysters.
Journal of Shellfish Research. 30: 737-749.
Kelly, C.J. and R.L. Turner. 2011. Distribution of the Hermit Crab Clibanarius vittatus and Pagurus
maclaughlinae in the northern Indian River Lagoon, Florida: A reassessment after 30 years. Journal of
Crustacean Biology. 31: 296-303.
PUBLICATIONS (Peer-Reviewed Technical Paper)
Stryjewski. E., G.G. Goins, and C.J. Kelly. 2001. Quantitative morphological analysis od spinach leaves
grown under light-emitting diodes or sulfur-microwave lamps. SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-2272.
Ph.D. DISSERTATION
Kelly, C.J. 2011. Growth and physiology of eastern and suminoe oysters and the implications of
increased habitat complexity for associated oyster reef fauna. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of
Maryland. College Park, MD. 230 pp.
ORAL PRESENTATIONS
Kelly, C.J., and R.I.E. Newell. 2011. The behavior of fish predators and their interaction with prey
species are influenced by the level of structural complexity within their habitat. Benthic Ecology
Meeting, Mobile AL, 16 – 21 March
Kelly, C.J., and R.I.E. Newell. 2010. The importance of habitat complexity, refuge, and prey availability
on the attraction of grass shrimp, white perch, and striped bass to structure. American Fisheries Society,
Pittsburgh PA, 14 September.
Kelly, C.J., and R.I.E. Newell. 2009. Seasonal scope for growth of diploid Crassostrea ariakensis and
Crassostrea virginica under ambient conditions simulating the mesohaline and polyhaline regions of
Chesapeake Bay. Coastal and Estuarine research Federation, Portland OR, 3 November.
Kelly, C.J., R.I.E. Newell, J. Scarpa, S.E. Laramore, and R.B. Carnegie. 2008. Diploid Crassostrea
virginica and Crassostrea ariakensis studies in mesocosms simulating Chesapeake Bay and Florida
estuaries. National Shellfisheries Association, Providence RI, 8 April.
Kelly, C.J., and R.L. Turner. 2001. The influence of altered hydrology on the population distribution of
two species of hermit crab (Clibanarius vittatus and Pagurus maclaughlinae) in the Indian River Lagoon
System. Florida Academy of Sciences, Saint Leo University, Saint Leo FL 9 March. [Outstanding
Student Paper Award for an undergraduate; Florida Institute of Technology Sigma Xi Chapter award for
best undergraduate paper.
CERTIFICATIONS
CPR/First Aid, Emergency First Response, 2012
Scientific Diver, AAUS, 2012 to present
Open Water SCUBA Diver, PADI, 1996
A-37
LUIS M. LAGERA, Jr., Ph.D.
Senior Scientist, Environmental Scientist
Dr. Lagera, a marine and estuarine ecologist with more than 19 years experience in
biological and environmental assessments, joined CSA International, Inc. (CSA) in 1992 and
Doctor of Philosophy in
Environmental Sciences has worked on numerous environmental and biological assessments for various clients in the
(Ecology), University of oil and gas industry, focusing mainly on impacts to water quality and biology/ecology.
These assessments include seismic, exploration drilling, and development/production
Virginia, 1988
projects in the Gulf of Mexico and abroad, including Angola (West Africa), Argentina
(offshore Patagonia/South Atlantic), Congo (Gulf of Guinea), Cote d’Ivoire (Gulf of
Guinea), Cyprus (eastern Mediterranean), Equatorial Guinea (Gulf of Guinea), Egypt
Mississippi State
(Gulf of Suez), Eritrea (southern Red Sea), Gabon (Gulf of Guinea), Ghana (Gulf of
University, 1984
Guinea), Ireland (Porcupine Basin in the North Atlantic), Lebanon (eastern Mediterranean),
Malaysia (South China Sea), Nigeria-São Tomé (Gulf of Guinea), Qatar (Arabian Gulf),
Zoology, University of
Russia (Sea of Azov and Sea of Okhotsk [Sakhalin Island]), Sierra Leone (Gulf of Guinea),
the Philippines,
Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago (Caribbean), and Turkey (eastern Mediterranean).
Diliman, 1978
Dr. Lagera also was a co-author and geographic information system (GIS) Coordinator for
the Environmental Report of the 5-Year Oil and Gas Leasing Program for seven OCS
planning areas and co-author of the Environmental Assessment of Geological and
Geophysical (G&G) Exploration in the Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf for the U.S.
Minerals Management Service. He is familiar with the fate and effects of oil and gas
discharges and was co-author of a study of environmental effects of produced water from
offshore and coastal production wells for the Department of Energy (DOE). He also
prepared a review of the fate and effects of mercury in produced water on the marine
environment.
Education
In addition to his expertise in environmental impact assessments, Dr. Lagera has extensive
quality assurance (QA) experience in the oil and gas industry. As CSA’s QA Officer, he is
familiar with a range of field methods, analytical procedures, and regulatory requirements
for environmental surveys and monitoring programs. He routinely reviews laboratory
results, processes datasets, provides data analysis and reporting support, and reviews reports
for baseline and monitoring surveys. He was QA officer for multiple field studies associated
with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for a petroleum
refinery in Puerto Rico, for a study of synthetic-based muds for the American Petroleum
Institute, for a study of bioaccumulation from produced water discharges in the Gulf of
Mexico for the Offshore Operators Committee, for a DOE-sponsored study of environmental
effects of produced water from offshore and coastal production wells, and for numerous
environmental baseline or monitoring surveys. He has written several internal guidance
documents, including protocols; standard operating procedures; and guidelines for field
activities, use and maintenance of equipment, QA, and GIS development. He has conducted
several orientation and training sessions on environmental management and field methods,
including QA.
Dr. Lagera was formerly CSA’s Health, Safety, Environment (HSE) Manager and
coordinated development of CSA’s HSE Handbook and has prepared HSE-related
documents, including project-specific HSE Plans for offshore surveys. He prepared
emergency response plans and medical emergency response plans for offshore surveys and a
shore-based survey in Russia. He assisted in conducting HSE inspections of survey vessels
and conducted HSE briefings for survey personnel. He also has prepared oil spill response
plans for exploratory drilling projects.
A-38
He assisted National Power Corporation (NPC) in the Philippines in strengthening its
corporate environmental management program through a year-long appointment as an
environmental consultant to the Office of the President. As consultant to NPC, he prepared
corporate environmental policies, technical implementing guidelines, and funding proposals;
conducted training seminars; and provided expert testimony in congressional and court
hearings on environmental impacts of electromagnetic fields, oil spills, and exploratory
drilling.
He participated in the development of the Water Quality Monitoring Program (WQMP) for
the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). In addition to monitoring nearshore and offshore water quality,
the WQMP also involved monitoring the status of coral reefs and seagrass beds within the
FKNMS. He has evaluated environmental and biological characteristics of potential
underwater test sites along the Gulf of Mexico and east coast for the U.S. Navy.
He has managed and conducted numerous research projects, supervised laboratory and field
personnel, and successfully acquired research grants from private and governmental
agencies. Dr. Lagera has research interests and experience in several coastal systems,
particularly tropical and temperate wetlands, seagrass beds, barrier island lagoons, estuaries,
and reef communities. He has also participated as a data manager and observer in aerial
surveys for marine mammals and sea turtles.
Dr. Lagera's technical experience and skills are varied and extensive. He is familiar with or
has used standard and EPA-approved methods, including automated monitoring and
analytical equipment. He has deployed and maintained automated water quality sensors,
data loggers, and current meters. He has a background in the taxonomy and ecology of
marine invertebrates, fishes, mammals, and sea turtles. He has training and experience in
experimental design, univariate and multivariate statistics, and regression analysis using
packages such as SAS, BMDP, and SPSS. He has extensive experience in the scientific
applications of software packages, including Excel, Access, Paradox, Surfer, Grapher, and
SigmaPlot, particularly relating to data processing, statistical analysis, quality control, and
data management. He also has training and experience in ArcGIS (ArcView), MapInfo, and
ArcInfo GIS and ERDAS image analysis software. He has used GIS extensively for data
analysis and presentation, exclusionary mapping, and sampling station selection.
Additionally, he is familiar with using Internet resources for scientific research.
Prior to joining CSA, Dr. Lagera was the Project/Applied Research Coordinator of the
Virginia Coast Reserve Long-term Ecological Research Program at the University of
Virginia (UVa). He served as project manager for the Northampton County Water Quality
Monitoring Project, a collaborative effort of several private, academic, and governmental
organizations. As a research associate, Dr. Lagera conducted studies on water column
productivity, water quality, and nutrient dynamics in a barrier island lagoon system and
groundwater hydrology on a barrier island. His graduate work centered on the processing of
organic matter in estuarine systems, particularly decomposition in mangrove forests and
temperate saltmarshes. Before joining UVa, Dr. Lagera was on the faculty of the Institute of
Biology, University of the Philippines and taught undergraduate and graduate biology and
environmental science courses.
A-39
PUBLICATIONS
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Corporate Oil Spill Prevention and Response Plan (Institutional Strengthening of
the Environmental Management Program, NPC). Final report to the NPC, Diliman, Quezon City, PH.
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Corporate Social Responsibility Program Policy Guidelines (Institutional
Strengthening of the Environmental Management Program, NPC). Final report to the NPC, Diliman,
Quezon City, PH.
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Electromagnetic fields and health risks: a primer. Prepared for the Environmental
Management Department, NPC, Dillman, Quezon City, PH.
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Environmental Audit Manual (Institutional Strengthening of the Environmental
Management Program, NPC). Final report to the NPC, Diliman, Quezon City, PH.
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Environmental Policy Guidelines (Institutional Strengthening of the Environmental
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Environmental Unit Development Plan (Institutional Strengthening of the
Environmental Management Program, NPC). Final report to the NPC, Diliman, Quezon City, PH.
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Pollution Control Officer's Handbook (Institutional Strengthening of the
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Status and Needs Assessment Report (Institutional Strengthening of the
Lagera, L.M. 1996. Technical/Operational Guidelines (Institutional Strengthening of the Environmental
Lagera, L.M. 1992. A study of water quality conditions in tidal creeks of Northampton County,
Virginia. Report for the Virginia Environmental Endowment, The Nat. Conserv., and the Northampton
County Board of Supervisors.
Lagera, L.M. 1992. Primer on water quality parameters.
Lagera, L.M. 1992. Technical handbook for the Northampton County Water Quality Monitoring
Project.
Lagera, L.M. and J.C. Zieman, Jr. 1988. Net production and oxygen consumption in the surface water
of the lower York River (abstract). EOS 69:357.
Lagera, L.M. and J.C. Zieman, Jr. 1988. Oxygen consumption in the surface waters and in decomposing
macrophytes in the lower York River (abstract). EOS 68:1757.
Lagera, L.M. and J.C. Zieman, Jr. 1988. The relative significance of macrophyte decomposition and
phytoplankton respiration in the consumption of oxygen in the lower Chesapeake Bay. Proc. Chesap.
Bay Conf. 29 to 31 March 1988. Baltimore, MD.
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
American Geophysical Union, 1988
American Society of Limnology and Oceanography, 1985
Atlantic Estuarine Research Society, 1987
Ecological Society of America, 1987
Estuarine Research Federation, 1986
A-40
STEPHEN T. VIADA
Senior Staff Scientist, Marine Biologist
Education
Biological
Oceanography, Texas
A&M University, 1980
Zoology, Texas A&M
University, 1978
Mr. Viada specializes in the evaluation of impacts of offshore oil and gas operations on the
marine environment. He has served as program manager and principal investigator for
projects in both U.S. and international offshore areas, including the Gulf of Mexico, Florida,
California, Alaska, Russia, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Indonesia,
Africa, the Bahamas, and Trinidad. These projects include environmental baseline surveys,
monitoring programs, Phase I environmental assessments, and environmental impact
assessments (reports and statements) for offshore seismic activities, and oil and gas
exploration and production. Offshore surveys include benthic as well as marine mammal
and turtle surveys involving the collection of quantitative and qualitative video and still
photographic data, fish and invertebrate samples, water quality and water column
productivity samples, and sediment chemistry and geology samples.
Mr. Viada is experienced with field studies and resource management and conservation
issues pertaining to protected and listed marine mammal, bird, and turtle species. He has
conducted several systematic surveys of these resources within the Gulf of Mexico, Atlantic
Ocean, Alaska, Australia, Africa, and Russia. He has been a primary author for the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) environmental impact analysis reports, including
Environmental Assessment (EA), Environmental Impact Analysis (EIA), and Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) reports that address concerns of these resources, including protected
and listed species. As staff biologist with the U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals
Management Service (MMS), he was directly responsible for all issues that involved the
effects of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) production and activities upon marine mammal and
marine bird resources within the Gulf of Mexico and for addressing these issues within the
MMS Environmental Impact Statement for the Gulf of Mexico Central and Western
Planning Areas Lease Sales.
Mr. Viada is an experienced marine ecologist/oceanographer who has specialized in benthic
community characterization, mapping, and ecology. He has had over 29 years experience in
the management and execution of studies that utilize photographic techniques for the
qualitative and quantitative analyses of benthic communities, primarily both shallow water
and deepwater coral reef and coral-dominated hard bottom communities. He also has over
29 years of experience as a specialist in taxonomic identification of scleractinian corals and
octocorals.
1993 to Present: CSA International, Inc. – Senior Staff Scientist, Marine Biologist

Principal investigator and lead scientist for an environmental survey off southwestern Ecuador for
Noble Energy, Inc. (2010).

Project manager and contributing author of an Environmental Impact Assessment document
pertaining to proposed nearshore seismic survey operations and exploration drilling off northeast
Mozambique for Anadarko Moçambique Área 1, Lda (2008).

Project manager and lead scientist of a characterization study of the deepwater coral
Lophelia pertusa and other deepwater hard bottom biological communities in the north-central Gulf of
Mexico for the MMS (2003 to 2007).
A-41
STEPHEN T. VIADA

Principal author of an Environmental Assessment (Integrated AMDAL) for the gas exploitation, gas
transmission, liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant, sea port, airfield, and resettlement associated with the
Tangguh LNG Project (Manokwari, Sorong, and Fak-Fak Regencies, Papua Province–Irian Jaya
[Western Papua]) for Pertamina and British Petroleum (2003).

Lead scientist of a study to determine the effects of offshore drilling activities within deepwater
(continental slope) environments within the Gulf of Mexico for the MMS (2002 to 2003).

Project manager and contributing author of a literature review and data synthesis report pertaining to
marine mammals and fisheries off Sakhalin Island (Russia) for British Petroleum (2002).

Project manager for a review of a proposed Scope of Work to conduct a study of the feeding ecology
of the western Pacific gray whale off Sakhalin Island (Russia) for LGL Ltd. (2002).

Lead scientist of a study to determine the effects of synthetic-based drilling fluids within continental
shelf and continental slope environments of the Gulf of Mexico for the American Petroleum Institute
(API) (2001).

Program manager and principal investigator of aerial survey program for the assessment of marine
mammals and sea turtles offshore of Mayport, Florida, for the U.S. Navy WINSTON CHURCHILL
(DDG 81) shipshock trial program (1997).
Awarded Visiting Scientist Grants at the Smithsonian Institute’s National Museum of Natural
History (Washington, D.C.) to study deep water octocorals of the North Atlantic (1998 and 2009).


Program manager and principal investigator of aerial survey program for the assessment of the North
Atlantic right whale and other endangered marine mammal and sea turtle species offshore of Georgia and
Florida for the U.S. Navy (1996 to 1999).

Principal investigator and lead scientist of the long-term monitoring study of the Flower Garden
Banks (northwest Gulf of Mexico) for the MMS (1995 to 1996).

Program manager and principal investigator of an aerial survey program for the assessment of
marine mammals and sea turtles offshore of Norfolk, Virginia, and Mayport, Florida, for the U.S. Navy
SEAWOLF submarine shipshock trial program (1995).

Program manager and lead scientist of the North Sakhalinsk Shelf (Russia) marine mammal and
seabird surveys and pre-drilling biological and chemical surveys for Exxon Petroleum Company and
Marathon Petroleum Company (1994 to 1995).
1991 to 1993: U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service, New Orleans, Louisiana –
Biologist

Contributing author of lease sale Environmental Impact Statements, including editing, production of
graphics, and in-depth preparation of sections of each impact statement directly related to the marine
mammal, marine bird/waterfowl, and hardbottom community resources in the northern Gulf of Mexico.

Contract inspector for Contract 14-35-0001-30619: The Distribution and Abundance of Marine
Mammals in the North-Central and Western Gulf of Mexico (GULFCET). Participant on shipboard and
aerial surveys of marine mammals within the central and western Gulf of Mexico.

Private consultant for taxonomic identifications of collected and photographed scleractinian corals
and octocorals.
1983 to 1984: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – NOAA Corps, Seattle,
Washington
A-42
STEPHEN T. VIADA
PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATIONS
Viada, S.T. In preparation. A new species of Anthothela (Anthozoa: Octocorallia) from the northeast
Gulf of Mexico.
Viada S.T., R.M. Hammer, R. Racca, D. Hannay, M.J. Thompson, B.J. Balcom, and N.W. Phillips.
2008. Review of potential impacts to sea turtles from underwater explosive removal of offshore
structures. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 28(4-5):267-285.
Viada, S.T. and S.D. Cairns. 2007. A new species of Nicella (Anthozoa: Octocorallia) from the
northeast Gulf of Mexico. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 120(2):227-231.
Viada, S.T. and S.D. Cairns. 1988. Range extensions of ahermatypic Scleractinia in the Gulf of Mexico.
Northeast Gulf Science 9(2):131-134.
Cordes, E., M. McGinley, E. Podowski, E. Becker, S. Lessard-Pilon, S.V iada, and C. Fisher. 2008.
Coral communities of the deep Gulf of Mexico. Deep-Sea Research Part I, 55(6):777-787.
Bright, T. J., G.P. Kraemer, G.A. Minnery, and S.T. Viada. 1984. Hermatypes of the Flower Garden
Banks, Northwestern Gulf of Mexico: A comparison to other western Atlantic reefs. Bulletin of Marine
Science 34(3):461-476.
Marine Mammal Observer (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) (2007)
Protected Species Observer (Minerals Management Service) (2007)
U.S. Coast Guard Merchant Marine Officer License: Master of steam or motor vessels up to 200 gross
tons
Oxygen Enriched Air (Nitrox) Dive Gas Blender – IANTD (2002)
Nitrox Diver – IANTD/NURP (1994)
Divemaster – NOAA (1984)
Limited Diver – NOAA (1982)
Variable Volume Diving Suit – NOAA (1982)
SCUBA Cylinder Inspection – NAUI (1984)
Advanced SCUBA Diver – PADI (1984)
Rescue Diver – PADI (1984)
Senior Diver – NASDS (1972)
Basic Diver – NASDS (1969)
Advanced Multimedia Standard First Aid – American Red Cross (2008)
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) – American Red Cross (2008)
A-43
DAVID B. SNYDER
Senior Scientist, Marine Biologist
Education
Marine
Biology/Ichthyology,
Florida Atlantic
University, 1984
Zoology, University of
Florida, 1978
Mr. Snyder is an experienced marine ecologist and fish biologist. He has more than 25 years
of experience in the ecology and taxonomy of western Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico shelf and
shore fishes (particularly seagrass and reef-associated species). He has managed and
participated in ichthyofaunal surveys of freshwater, estuarine, shelf, and coral reef habitats.
He has sampled fish from a variety of habitats ranging from the continental slope to
freshwater streams for various environmental assessments and monitoring studies.
Mr. Snyder has visually censused fish assemblages off southeast and southwest Florida, the
Federated States of Micronesia, Grand Cayman Island, and the Bahamas using quantitative
and qualitative methods. He surveyed fishes associated with hard bottom areas subject to
impact from dredge and fill projects off the eastern and western Florida coasts. He has
monitored reef fish assemblages on nearshore natural and artificial reefs for the town of
Palm Beach and Palm Beach County Florida. He has characterized fish assemblages on a
deep reef trend in the northern Gulf of Mexico from videotapes taken by a remotely operated
vehicle. He is currently working with colleagues at the Florida Museum of Natural History
to assemble a comprehensive listing and assessment of marine fishes of southwest Florida
and the Florida Keys. He recently studied the response of fish assemblages to water flows
and levels in the Loxahatchee River, Florida, using electrofishing gear for the South Florida
Water Management District. He is currently investigating habitat utilization by newly settled
fishes on nearshore hard bottom habitats in Palm Beach County, Florida for the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection. Mr. Snyder is also managing an independent
monitoring program for seagrass-associated fishes in the vicinity of Jupiter Inlet, Florida. He
has participated in coral reef damage assessment and restoration projects in south Florida,
the Florida Keys, and the Federated States of Micronesia.
Mr. Snyder is experienced with coral re-attachment techniques used in rehabilitation of
damaged coral reefs. He has worked with commercial fishermen assessing the impacts of
shrimp trawling on inshore fish populations in Florida. He also has investigated the life
history of the bigeye scad, an important baitfish in southern Florida. He has participated as a
Chief Field Scientist on numerous photodocumentation surveys in the Gulf of Mexico and
off the Atlantic coast. Mr. Snyder managed field efforts that included trawling, sediment
profile imaging, and grab sampling for assessments of sand deposits proposed as borrow
sites for beach nourishment offshore of Alabama, Florida, New Jersey, New York, and North
Carolina. He also managed a project that investigated the potential conflict between
deepwater fisheries and oil and gas operations in the Gulf of Mexico. He currently manages
a project that investigates the ecological functions of nearshore hard bottom along the east
coast of Florida for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
Mr. Snyder has prepared the fish and fisheries sections of several environmental reports. He
summarized commercial and recreational fisheries data for Florida, southern California, and
the southeastern United States. He has prepared Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) assessments
for several environmental impact statements and environmental assessments. Mr. Snyder
has extensive experience in the identification, collection, and annotation of marine
environmental literature and data.
A-44
DAVID B. SNYDER
Prior to joining CSA, Mr. Snyder participated in an ecological study of the fish fauna
associated with the discharge canals at Florida Power and Light's nuclear power plant at
Crystal River, Florida. He also served as Research Assistant on a U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) project investigating the biology and impacts of introduced fishes in
Florida. Mr. Snyder's thesis work entailed monthly collections of seagrass fishes from two
estuarine sites near Jupiter Inlet, Florida. He was also Chief Field Scientist and vessel
operator during an ichthyoplankton survey of the Loxahatchee River Estuary, Florida. In
addition, he worked as a commercial fisherman in Jupiter, Florida for 13 years. Mr. Snyder
is an accomplished underwater photographer; his underwater fish photographs have appeared
in regional field guides as well as technical and popular publications. His diving experience
includes more than 1,200 dives; he is experienced in benthic photography and videotaping,
in-situ identification of coral reef fishes, reattachment and transplanting both hard corals and
octocorals, and the collection of various types of sediment samples.
1984 to Present: CSA International, Inc. – Senior Scientist

Chief scientist and project manager for an evaluation of ecological function and mitigation of
nearshore hard bottom in southeast Florida (Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2007 to
present).

Chief scientist and project manager for an assessment of relationships between fish assemblages and
dry season flow and stage levels on the riverine reach of the northwest fork of the Loxahatchee River,
Florida (South Florida Water Management District, 2008).

Chief scientist and project manager for monitoring of hard bottom adjacent to fill and borrow areas
for a beach nourishment project offshore Venice, Florida (Coastal Technology Corporation, 2005 to
present).

Monitored fish assemblages associated with artificial mitigation reefs and natural hard bottom in
conjunction with a beach nourishment project offshore Phipps Park in Palm Beach, Florida (Coastal
Planning and Engineering, 2005 to present).

Managed a fish and epibiotic monitoring program designed to assess the efficacy of artificial reefs as
a means of mitigating the effects of beach nourishment projects on nearshore hard bottom habitat off
Palm Beach County, Florida. Quantitative data on fish and invertebrate assemblages associated with
artificial reefs and natural reefs were collected during summer months. Preliminary analyses indicated
that fish assemblages on artificial reefs differed from those on natural reefs (Palm Beach County
Department of Environmental Resources Management, 2001 to present).

Managed field surveys for three projects designed to characterize the biota associated with sand
deposits proposed as borrow sites for beach nourishment projects offshore of New York and New Jersey.
Data collected included temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, sediment grain size, sediment profile
imagery infauna, epifauna, and demersal fishes (Minerals Management Service, 2000 to present).

Analyzed potential interactions between bluewater fishing and deepwater oil and gas operations in
the Gulf of Mexico. Fisheries and energy industry information was gathered to assess the potential for
problems in the rapidly expanding deepwater oil and gas effort. Current and past conflicts reported in
domestic and international waters were examined as well. Areas of potential future conflict were
predicted using Geographic Information Systems analyses (Minerals Management Service, 1998 to
present).
A-45
DAVID B. SNYDER

Prepared a characterization and trends of recreational and commercial fisheries from the Florida
panhandle. This project summarized available recreational and commercial fisheries data from Florida's
panhandle for the 1983 to 1993 period. The results will assist federal mangers in preventing conflicts
between fisheries and oil and gas exploration and development proposed for the panhandle outer
continental shelf (National Biological Service, 1995 to 1998).
PUBLICATIONS)
Snyder, D.B. and G.H. Burgess. 2006. The Indo-Pacific red lionfish, Pterois volitans (Pisces:
Scorpaenidae), new to Bahamian ichthyofauna. Coral Reefs.
Byrnes, M.R., R.M. Hammer, T.D. Thibaut, and D.B. Snyder. 2004. Physical and biological effects of
sand mining offshore Alabama, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research, 20(1):6-24.
Byrnes, M.R., R.M. Hammer, T.D. Thibaut, and D.B. Snyder. 2004. Effects of sand mining on physical
processes and biological communities offshore New Jersey, U.S.A. Journal of Coastal Research,
20(1):25-43.
Snyder, D.B., J.E. Randall, and S.W. Michael. 2001. Aggressive mimicry by the redmouth grouper
(Aetheloperca rogaa). Cybium, 25(3):227-232.
Snyder, D.B., K.D. Spring, B.D. Graham, S.T. Viada, and D. Hardin. 2000. Northeastern Gulf of
Mexico Coastal and Marine Ecosystem Program: Ecosystem monitoring, Mississippi/Alabama shelf;
hard bottom communities, pp. 341-346. In: McKay, M. and J. Nides (eds.), Proceedings eighteenth
annual Gulf of Mexico Information Transfer Meeting, December 1998. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA. OCS Study MMS
2000-030. 538 pp.
Snyder, D.B. 1999. Mimicry of initial-phase bluehead wrasse, Thalassoma bifasciatus (Labridae) by
juvenile tiger grouper, Mycteroperca tigris (Serranidae). Revue Francaise d'Aquariologie 26(1-2):17-20.
Lindeman, K.C. and D.B. Snyder. 1999. Nearshore hard bottom fishes of southeast Florida and effects
of habitat burial by dredging. Fishery Bulletin 3:508-525.
Taylor, J.N., D.B. Snyder, and W.R. Courtenay, Jr. 1986. Hybridization between two substrate
spawning tilapias in southern Florida. Copeia 4:903-909.
Snyder, D.B. 1984. Species richness, abundance, and occurrence of grassbed fishes from Jupiter Inlet,
Florida. Masters thesis, Florida Atlantic University. 75 pp.
U.S. Coast Guard Ocean Operator
Open Water SCUBA Diver – Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI)
Nitrox Certified – PADI
Multimedia Standard First Aid – American Red Cross
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) – American Red Cross
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
American Fisheries Society
American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists
International Society for Reef Studies
Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute
A-46
ALAN D. HART, Ph.D.
Science Director, Executive Vice President
Dr. Hart has over 30 years of oceanographic and environmental science experience. He has
served as Project Manager on numerous oil and gas industry projects. Currently, he is
Doctor of Philosophy in
Deputy Project Manager for a major Minerals Management Service (MMS)-sponsored
Oceanography, Texas
interdisciplinary study of environmental effects from cuttings discharges for synthetic-based
A&M University, 1981
drilling muds systems of selected sites on the continental slope of the Gulf of Mexico. He is
also the Project Manager and responsible for experimental design, data analysis, data
Zoology, Texas Tech
interpretation, and reporting for a major study of the environmental fate and effects of drill
University, 1973
cuttings discharged in association with synthetic-based drilling muds systems. This study is
jointly sponsored by industry and government (MMS and U.S. Department of Energy
[DOE]). He has conducted several studies concerning predicting the environmental
consequences of unintentional petroleum hydrocarbon discharges in the vicinity of sensitive
biological communities. These projects involved incorporating aspects of toxicity studies
from the literature, literature review of the sensitive biological communities, and modeling
dispersion and movement of spilled hydrocarbons. He was also the Project Manager for a
major water quality study for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary to develop a water
quality protection plan for the Environmental Protection Agency. Dr. Hart has also served as
Task Leader and Assistant Project Manager on a number of major multidisciplinary projects,
including a recently completed multimillion dollar study of offshore platforms for DOE and
another major multimillion dollar study of bioaccumulation of produced water discharges
into the Gulf of Mexico performed for the Offshore Operators Committee.
Education
Dr. Hart has served as an environmental consultant for numerous industry clients and
Federal and State agencies concerning developmental activities in the Gulf of Mexico,
Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, Sea of Okhotsk, Caribbean and Caspian Seas, and Alaska
waters. He is experienced in assessing environmental impacts as they are related to
biological, chemical, geological, and physical oceanography. Dr. Hart has developed
sampling designs, performed the statistical analyses of the data, and prepared and edited the
manuscripts for numerous biological assessments of offshore and coastal areas,
multidisciplinary baseline studies, and ecosystem programs.
Dr. Hart routinely serves as CSA's data manager, data analyst, and ecological statistician for
projects including large scale multidisciplinary studies requiring database manipulation and
computer analyses. He routinely supervises data entry and data processing, and provides
software support and statistical services for principal investigators on large multidisciplinary
research projects. He has been responsible for data management and statistical analyses for
numerous baseline studies and environmental monitoring programs in connection with outer
continental shelf oil and gas activities. Prior to joining CSA, Dr. Hart served as a Data
Manager on the Bryan Mound Site Brine Impact Study of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Project funded by the DOE. He also worked at the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station as
a programmer on a National Marine Fisheries Service Grant to provide vessel budget
simulations for the Texas shrimping fleet.
A-47
ALAN D. HART, Ph.D.
February 1982 to Present: CSA International, Inc. – Science Director, Executive Vice President

Project Manager of a project to characterize northern Gulf of Mexico deepwater hard bottom
communities with emphasis on the deepwater coral Lophelia. This was a 3-year study sponsored by the
MMS. It involved 2 years of field work utilizing the Johnson SeaLink submersible and coordination of
multiple subcontractors from University of Oregon, Pennsylvania State University, Dauphin Island
Marine Laboratory, Florida State University, and the Smithsonian Institution.

Project Manager and responsible for experimental design, data analysis, data interpretation, and
reporting for a major study of the environmental fate and effects of drill cuttings discharged in
association with synthetic-based drilling muds systems. This study is jointly sponsored by industry and
government (MMS and DOE).

Chief Project Scientist and Data Manager for an environmental monitoring program for the Offshore
Operators Committee (OOC) titled the Gulf of Mexico Produced Water Bioaccumulation Study. The
objectives of the program were to determine whether statistically significant bioaccumulation of
produced water related organics and inorganics occurs in the edible tissue of resident fishes and
invertebrates in the immediate vicinity of representative Gulf of Mexico offshore platforms that
discharge more than 4,600 barrels per day of produced water, and to evaluate the environmental
significance of any statistically significant increases observed due to produced water related
bioaccumulation in edible tissue. Produced water, ambient water, and fish and invertebrate tissue
samples were collected for analyses of volatile and semivolatile organic compounds, metals, and
radionuclides. Dr. Hart finalized Post-Survey Reports and Data Reports submitted after each of the three
cruises. Final Reports and a Bioaccumulation Literature Review were prepared as separate deliverables.
Dr. Hart also presented final results orally at a technical conference and in a paper published in a
peer-reviewed scientific journal (Offshore Operators Committee, 1994 to 1997).

Chief Project Scientist and Data Manager for a 3-year, multimillion dollar study of the potential
environmental, economic, and health impacts associated with produced water, produced sand, and other
discharges from oil and gas operations in the Gulf of Mexico. Dr. Hart coordinated CSA's role as the
prime contractor for the study, managing a seven-company team of experts, and organizing and
coordinating a Scientific Review Committee. The primary project goal was to increase the base of
scientific knowledge concerning the 1) fate and environmental effects of organics, trace metals, and
naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) in water, sediment, and biota near several offshore oil
and gas facilities; 2) characteristics of produced water and produced sand discharges as they pertain to
organics, trace metals, and NORM variably found in association with the discharges; 3) recovery of four
terminated produced water discharge sites located in wetland and high-energy open bay sites of coastal
Louisiana and Texas; 4) economic and energy supply impacts of existing and anticipated Federal and
State offshore and coastal discharge regulations; and 5) catch, consumption, and human use patterns of
seafood species collected from coastal and offshore waters (U.S. Department of Energy, 1992 to 1997).

Conducted an analysis of the Marine Industry Response Group/S. L. Ross Spill Impact Assessment
Model was conducted in two phases. Phase I included training on the model as well as a review process
with State and Federal agency representatives. This review process included identifying proper agencies
and personnel, preparing appropriate discussion issues with those individuals, and finally conducting
those discussions. Phase II included a peer review of the model to the extent of addressing the concerns
of the Phase I discussions with the State and Federal agencies (Marine Industry Response Group, 1991 to
1993).
A-48
ALAN D. HART, Ph.D.

Data Manager/Biostatistician for CSA's portions of the MMS Southwest Florida Shelf Ecosystems
Study, a major multidisciplinary environmental study. Data were from sediment grain size, trace metal,
and hydrocarbon samples; macroinfaunal samples; dredge and trawl samples; and bottom photographs
(Minerals Management Service, 1982 to 1987).
PUBLICATIONS (Corporate)
Uhler, A.D., R.M. Uhler, and A.D. Hart. 2004. Chapter 8 - The Organic Chemistry of Synthetic Based
Fluid Residues and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Sediments. In: Continental Shelf Associates, Inc.,
Gulf of Mexico Comprehensive Synthetic Based Muds Monitoring Program. A report prepared for the
SBM Research Group.
Continental Shelf Associates, Inc. 1998. Joint EPA/Industry screening survey to assess the deposition of
drill cuttings and associated synthetic based mud on the seabed of the Louisiana Continental Shelf, Gulf
of Mexico, Data Report. Report for the American Petroleum Institute Health & Environmental Sciences
Dept., Washington, D.C.
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, and L.L. Lagera, Jr. 1997. Chapter 2 - Study design and overview.
In: Continental Shelf Associates, Inc., Radionuclides, Metals, and Hydrocarbons In Oil and Gas
Operational Discharges and Environmental Samples Associated with Offshore Production Facilities on
the Texas/Louisiana Continental Shelf with an Environmental Assessment of Metals and Hydrocarbons.
A report prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, Bartlesville, Oklahoma.
PUBLICATIONS (Individual)
Hart, A.D., D.B. Snyder, K.D. Spring, and R.M. Hammer. 2006. Application of Scientific Experimental
Design in Monitoring Hard Bottom Habitats Associated with Areas of Beach Nourishment. Proceedings
of the 19th Annual National Conference on Beach Preservation Technology February 1-3, 2006, Sarasota,
Florida.
Neff, J.M., A.D. Hart, J.P. Ray, J.M. Limia, and T.W. Purcell. 2005. An Assessment of Seabed Impacts
of Synthetic-Based-Drilling-Mud Cuttings in the Gulf of Mexico, SPE 94086. SPE/EPA/DOE
Exploration and Production Environmental Conference, 7-9 March 2005, Galveston, Texas
Gettleson, D.A., A.D. Hart, S.T. Viada, and N.W. Phillips. 2004. Effects of Oil and Gas Exploration
and Development at Selected Continental Slope Sites in the Gulf of Mexico, SPE 86773. SPE
International Conference on Health, Safety, and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production,
29-31 March 2004, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Hart, A.D. 2003. Effects of oil and gas exploration and development at selected continental slope sites
in the Gulf of Mexico. In: McKay, M. and J. Nides (eds.), Proceedings: Twenty-First Annual Gulf of
Mexico Information Transfer Meeting, January 2002. U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals
Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA. OCS Study MMS 2003-005.
748 pp.
Hart, A.D. 2003. Joint industry project, Gulf of Mexico Comprehensive Synthetic Based Muds
Monitoring Program: An overview. In: McKay, M. and J. Nides (eds.), Proceedings: Twenty-First
Annual Gulf of Mexico Information Transfer Meeting, January 2002. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, New Orleans, LA. OCS Study
MMS 2003-005. 748 pp.
A-49
ALAN D. HART, Ph.D.
Neff, J.M., T.C. Sauer, and A.Hart. 2000. Monitoring Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH)
Bioavailability Near Offshore Produced Water Discharge. Environmental Toxicology and Risk
Assessment: Science, Policy and Standardization – Implications for Environmental Decisions
(Tenth Volume), ASTM STP 1403. In: B.M. Greenberg, R.N. Hull, M.H. Roberts, Jr., and
R.W. Gensemer (eds.), American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania.
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, D.A. Gettleson, D.L. Demorest, and B.W. Smith. 1996. Naturally Occurring
In: Mark Reed and Ståle Johnsen (eds.), Produced Water 2, Environmental Science Research,
Volume 52, Plenum Press, New York NY.
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, D.A. Gettleson, D.L. Demorest, and B.W. Smith. 1995. Naturally Occurring
A presentation at the 1995 International Produced Water Seminar sponsored by STATOIL Research and
Development, 25-28 September 1995, Trondheim, Norway.
Hart, A.D., B.D. Graham, and D.A. Gettleson. 1995. NORM Associated with Produced Water
Discharges, SPE 29727. SPE/EPA Exploration and Production Environmental Conference,
27-29 March, Houston, Texas
Sturges, W., A.J. Clarke, S. Van Gorder, X. Liu, and A.D. Hart. 1994. Current-meter observations south
of Pensacola: Comparison of wind-forced currents with the Clarke-Van Gorder Model. A presentation at
the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico Physical Oceanography Workshop sponsored by the Minerals
Management Service, New Orleans OCS Office. Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL.
Hart, A.D., B. Graham, and D.A. Gettleson. 1993. Concentrations of naturally occurring radioactive
materials associated with produced water discharges from production platforms in the northwestern Gulf
of Mexico. Presentation at the 14th Meeting of the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,
Houston, TX.
Randolph, T.M., R.C. Ayers, Jr., R.A. Shaul, A.D. Hart, W.T. Shebs, J.P. Ray, S.A. Savant-Malhiet, and
R.V. Rivera. 1992. Radium fate and oil removal for discharged produced sand. In: J.P. Ray and
F.R. Engelhart (eds.), Produced Water. Plenum Press, New York, NY.
Deis, D.R.; Spring, K.D., and Hart, A.D. 1992. Captiva Beach restoration project - biological monitoring
program. In. New Directions in Beach Management, Proceedings of the 5 th Annual National Conference
on Beach Preservation Technology; St. Petersburg, FL. Florida Shore and Beach Preservation
Association; 227-241.
Brooks, J.M., M.C. Kennicutt, T.L. Wade, A.D. Hart, G.J. Denoux, and T.J. McDonald. 1990.
Hydrocarbon distributions around a shallow water multiwell platform. Environ. Sci. Technol.
24(7):1,079-1,085.
Hart, A.D., P.N. Boothe, and B.J. Presley. 1990. Fate and effects of routine discharges: Implications for
South Florida communities and resources, pp. 505-535. In: N.W. Phillips and K.S. Larson (eds.),
Synthesis of Available Biological, Geological, Chemical, Socioeconomic, and Cultural Resource
Information for the South Florida Area. OCS Study MMS 90-0019. U.S. Department of the Interior,
Minerals Management Service, Atlantic OCS Region, Herndon, VA.
Thompson, M.J., A.D. Hart, and C.W. Kerlin. 1989. Exposure of deep seagrass beds off the west coast
of Florida to discharged drilling effluents, pp. 137-156. In: F.R. Engelhardt, J.P. Ray, and A.H. Gillam
(eds.), Drilling Wastes. Elsevier Applied Science, New York, NY.
Hart, A.D. 1985. The Offshore Operators' Committee drilling muds discharge model as a management
tool. Presentation at Information Transfer Meeting, Minerals Management Service, New Orleans, LA.
A-50
ALAN D. HART, Ph.D.
Cummings, J.A. and A.D. Hart. 1982. Data management, Chapter 8. In: R.W. Hann, Jr. and
R.E. Randall (eds.), Evaluation of Brine Disposal From the Bryan Mound Site of the Strategic Petroleum
Reserve Program. A final report submitted to the Department of Energy.
Hart, A.D. and J.H. Wormuth. 1982. Pelagic amphipods of the Gulf Stream cyclonic cold core rings.
Presented at Winter Meetings, AGU/ASLO.
Hart, A.D. and J.H. Wormuth. 1982. Pelagic amphipods - Gulf Stream cyclonic rings, data report.
Department of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. Ref. 82-3-T. 163 pp.
A-51
DAVID A. GETTLESON, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
Education
Dr. Gettleson has over 35 years of experience with environmental, social, health, and safety
issues associated with oil and gas development. He has managed numerous complex,
multidisciplinary oceanographic and coastal studies and has participated in many of the
scientific projects conducted by CSA since 1976.
Doctor of Philosophy
in Biological
Oceanography, Texas
A&M University,
Dr. Gettleson is an expert on the environmental impacts associated with the construction and
1976
operation of coastal and offshore oil and gas facilities. He has managed over 20 oil and gas
monitoring studies in the Gulf of Mexico. He has co-authored five papers on the fate and
Bachelor of Arts in
effects of drilling muds in the marine environment. He has had extensive interaction with
Biology, Rollins
Federal, State, and International agencies regarding the design of monitoring programs for
College, 1971
offshore oil and gas operations and has been involved in the permitting of over 250 oil and
gas lease blocks in the Gulf of Mexico and the U.S. east and west coasts, including Alaska.
He has provided expert witness testimony regarding the effects of oil and gas operations on
the biota of the Flower Garden Banks (coral reefs) in the Gulf of Mexico. He has managed a
number of international baseline surveys, environmental assessments, and monitoring
programs associated with oil and gas activity (Argentina - South Atlantic Ocean; Azerbaijan
- Caspian Sea; Bahamas - Atlantic Ocean; Bahrain - Arabian Gulf; Eritrea - Red Sea;
Georgia - Black Sea; Indonesia - Java Sea; Ireland - Atlantic Ocean [Celtic Sea]; Israel Mediterranean Sea; Mozambique - Indian Ocean; Qatar - Arabian Gulf; Russia - Sea of
Azov and Sea of Okhotsk [Sakhalin Island]; Taiwan - South China Sea; Trinidad - Atlantic
Ocean; Turkey - Mediterranean Sea; West Africa [Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Ghana,
and Ivory Coast] - Gulf of Guinea). He has managed five Sakhalin Island projects involving
the collection, analysis, and reporting of offshore baseline and monitoring data and samples.
Three of the projects (Indonesia, Qatar and Trinidad) included liquefied natural gas (LNG)
trains and financing by international banks. The Indonesian LNG project involved a set of
documents (environmental impact assessment, environmental management plan, and
environmental monitoring plan) for the construction and operation of offshore platforms,
offshore and onshore pipelines, and a liquefied natural gas plant with airfield and port
facilities in Papua, Indonesia. The management and monitoring plans detailed construction
contractor environmental and social related requirements as well as operational
requirements.
Dr. Gettleson has written, edited, reviewed, or supervised the preparation of numerous
baseline survey reports; environmental assessment documents, including Environmental
Impact Statements, Environmental Impact Reports, Environmental Reports; and Monitoring
Reports. The documents have covered a wide range of human activities, including oil and
gas operations, dredging and dredged material disposal, beach restoration, artificial reef
siting, underwater explosive testing, power and liquefied natural gas plants effluents, sewage
outfalls, and waste incineration.
A-52
EXPERIENCE
2006 to Present: CSA International, Inc. – Director, Senior Scientist

Assists with corporate strategic planning and business development.

Transferred to Herzliya, Israel to work in the Noble Energy Mediterranean, Ltd. office from
September 2011 until March 2012 followed by 4- to 6-week periods from May onward. Responsibilities
included environmental coordination between the drilling and environmental divisions; environmental
monitoring of a water flow from an exploration well; development of environmental sections of
discharge permit applications for several exploration, appraisal, and well completion projects; the
development/implementation of a sampling plan for the establishment of baseline and future monitoring
of the environment for the discharge of Tamar Development produced water; and the development of a
comprehensive Terms of Reference integrating Environmental Assessment with baseline sampling and
environmental monitoring of drilling (exploration and appraisal), well completions, and development
activities. Meetings and presentations were made to the Ministries of Energy and Water Resources
(formerly Ministry of National Infrastructures) and Environmental Protection as well as a nine-member
ministerial committee in support of Noble Energy’s activities.

Worked within a team of scientists at ExxonMobil Research in the development of a conceptual plan
and its implementation for the evaluation of marine ecological services in the Gulf of Mexico relative to
potential impacts from oil and gas activities and other potential impacts. The result was an ecosystem
services approach applied to marine environmental management.
August 1976 to 2006: CSA International, Inc. – President

(President - January 1987 to 2006; Scientific Director - August 1976 to August 1999; Vice President
- August 1976 to December 1986).

Program Director for a number of international environmental studies associated with oil and gas
operations. Locations have included Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Congo, Equatorial
Guinea, Eritrea, Gabon, Georgia, Ghana, Indonesia, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Qatar, Peru, Russia (Sea of
Azov and Sea of Okhotsk), Trinidad, and Turkey (Various clients, 1991 to Present).

Program Manager/Program Director for over 20 oil and gas monitoring studies in the Gulf of
Mexico. Locations included deepwater (1,000 m) locations, the Flower Garden Banks (coral reefs), other
northern Gulf hard banks, western Gulf soft bottom areas, eastern Gulf live bottom areas, Louisiana
marshes, and coastal waters off Alabama and Mississippi. Supervised monitoring program design,
negotiation, and execution, and presentation of results to Federal and State agencies (Various clients,
1976 to 2006).

Program Manager/Program Director for permitting of over 250 oil and gas lease blocks in the
Gulf of Mexico and the U.S. east and west coasts, including Alaska (Gulf of Alaska and North Slope).
Supervised all aspects of permitting, including preparation of Environmental Impact Reports, Area
Environmental Reports, Site-Specific Environmental Reports, Oil Spill Contingency Plans (including
computer trajectory modeling), Photodocumentation Survey Reports, and Environmental Monitoring
Plans (Various clients, 1976 to 2006).

Program Manager/Program Director for environmental evaluations of dredged material offshore
disposal sites, U.S. Navy ship-shock testing sites, and artificial reef sites; environmental assessments of
beach restoration projects; studies of at-sea waste incineration; estuarine habitat and water quality
projects; and environmental sampling programs in lakes, rivers, and streams (Various clients, 1976 to
2006).
A-53

Program Director for studies of power plant siting in Taiwan, R.O.C. Seven power plants in Taiwan
were studied to determine compliance with environmental regulations. A separate study evaluated the
impact on corals due to thermal discharge from a nuclear power plant in south Taiwan (FPL Qualtec,
1988 to 1989).

Program Manager and Co-Chief Scientist for the Southwest Florida Shelf Ecosystems Study. CSA
was prime contractor for one year and subcontractor for three years of this six-year, multidisciplinary
study (Minerals Management Service, 1980 to 1987).

Program Manager for CSA involving the preparation and negotiation of NPDES 301(h) variance
applications for five wastewater outfalls along the southeast coast of Florida (CH2M Hill, 1982 to 1984).

Retained as an expert witness with regard to oil and gas NPDES permits in the vicinity of the Flower
Garden Banks, Gulf of Mexico; drilling muds and cuttings discharges in State of Alabama coastal waters;
and an unauthorized discharge into a Texas coastal canal (Vinson & Elkins and Liskow & Lewis, 1981).

Co-Principal Investigator and Co-Chief Scientist for the Gulf Reef Fish Study, which determined the
most appropriate sampling devices for remotely assessing reef fishes and which compared fish
populations between oil and gas platforms and natural hard bottom areas (Bureau of Land Management,
1980 to 1981).

Program Manager and Chief Scientist for the BLM South Atlantic Hard Bottom Study, which
involved geophysical and video mapping of live bottom assemblages in the South Atlantic Bight (Bureau
of Land Management, 1978 to 1979).

Chief Scientist on a two-month oceanographic cruise in the Gulf of Alaska and Principal Author of
an environmental assessment concerning nine lease blocks on the outer continental shelf in the Gulf of
Alaska (Exxon Company, U.S.A., 1976).
1976: Texas A&M University – Post-doctoral Research Associate

Supervised two major research projects dealing with the meiofauna and macroinfauna of the south
Texas continental shelf, which were funded by the BLM (Principal Investigator, W.E. Pequegnat).
1971 to 1976: Texas A&M University – Graduate Student (also employed byTerEco Corporation)

Participated in study of five submarine banks on the continental shelf of the northwest Gulf of
Mexico (1975). Worked on baseline study of Stetson Bank (northwest Gulf of Mexico) to assess
environmental effects of oil and gas drilling (1974).

Member of field team that tested a Biotal Ocean Monitor in the Gulf of Mexico (1975). Also
member of field team that monitored the burning of chemical wastes by Shell Oil Co. on the incineration
ship VULCANUS in the Gulf of Mexico (1974).

Participated in water turbidity measurements and the collection of neuston samples at St. Croix,
Virgin Islands (1975). Also participated in an environmental assessment of south St. Croix for a
supertanker SALM (1973).

Analyzed benthic samples from the northern Gulf of Mexico shelf and slope (1972).
PUBLICATIONS
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 2012. Rapid Prioritization of Marine Ecosystem Services Using
Quantitative Valuation. (Manuscript submitted for publication.)
A-54
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 2004. Effects of Oil and Gas Exploration and Development at Selected
Continental Slope Sites in the Gulf of Mexico. A presentation and published paper (SPE 86773) at the
2004 Society of Petroleum Engineers Convention, 29-31 March 2004, Calgary, Canada.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1998. Baseline Environmental Surveys of the Piltun-Astokhskoye Field,
Offshore Sakhalin Island, Russia. A presentation at the 1998 American Association of Petroleum
Geologists Annual Convention, 17-20 May 1998, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1995. U.S. Department of Energy Sponsored Study - Environmental and
Economic Assessment of Discharges from Gulf of Mexico Region Oil and Gas Operations: An
Overview. A presentation at the 1995 International Produced Water Seminar sponsored by STATOIL
Research and Development, 25-28 September 1995, Trondheim, Norway.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1995. Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials Associated with Offshore
Produced Water Discharges in the Gulf of Mexico. A presentation at the 1995 International Produced
Water Seminar sponsored by STATOIL Research and Development, 25-28 September 1995, Trondheim,
Norway.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1990. Benthic biological studies of the southwest Florida shelf. Am.
Zool. 30:65-75.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1986. Fish assemblages and benthic biota associated with natural
hard-bottom areas in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico. N.E. Gulf Sci. 8:51-63.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1985. Dense polychaete (Phyllochaetopterus socialis) mats on the South
Carolina continental shelf. N.E. Gulf Sci. 7:167-170.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1985. Fishery management considerations based on a study of the effect of
oil and gas activities on reef fish assemblages in the Gulf of Mexico area. Bull. Mar. Sci. 37(1):397.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1984. Hard-bottom and live-bottom survey of Tarpon Springs Block 277
off the western coast of Florida. EOS Transactions, Am. Geophys. Union 64(52):1064.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1983. Comparison of geophysically defined hard bottom and visually
detected live bottom in the Charlotte Harbor Area of the southwest Florida shelf. In: Oceans 1983
Conference Record.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1982. Utilization of remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) for fish survey
standing stock assessments, pp. 1288-1293. In: Oceans '82 Conference Record, Washington, DC.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1982. Geophysical and biological seafloor mapping of four oil and gas
lease blocks in the South Atlantic Georgia Embayment, pp. 803-808. In: Oceans '82 Conference Record,
Washington, DC.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1982. Fish population assessment utilizing remotely operated vehicles
(ROVs). In: Agenda and Abstracts, Seventh Annual Tropical and Subtropical Fisheries Technological
Conference of the Americas, New Orleans, LA. Abstract.
Gettleson, D.A. (co-author). 1982. Environmental monitoring associated with the Port Everglades
Harbor Deepening Project of 1980. Florida Academy of Science Conference, Deland, Florida. Abstract.
Gettleson, D.A. 1981. Geophysical and biological seafloor mapping of four oil and gas lease blocks in
the South Atlantic Georgia Embayment. Reefs and Hardgrounds Workshop, sponsored by the U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management Gulf of Mexico OCS Office, New Orleans, LA.
Abstract.
A-55
Gettleson, D.A. 1981. Biological assemblages (live bottom) associated with hard bottom areas in the
Georgia Embayment and eastern Gulf of Mexico. In: Sixth Biennial International Estuarine Research
Conference, Estuarine Research Federation. Abstract.
Gettleson, D.A., et al. 1981. Environmental monitoring of three exploratory oil and gas wells drilled
near the East Flower Garden Bank in the Gulf of Mexico. In: Proceedings, 13 th Annual Offshore
Technology Conference, Houston, TX. OTC Paper No. 4061.
Gettleson, D.A., et al. 1980. Environmental monitoring associated with a production platform in the
Gulf of Mexico, pp. 263-270. In: Proceedings, 12th Annual Offshore Technology Conference. OTC
Paper No. 3706.
Gettleson, D.A. and C.E. Laird. 1980. Benthic barium levels in the vicinity of six exploratory drillsites
in the Gulf of Mexico, pp. 739-788. In: Symposium, Research on Environmental Fate and Effects of
Drilling Fluids and Cuttings.
Gettleson, D.A. 1980. Effects of oil and gas drilling operations on the marine environment, pp. 371-411.
In: Marine Environmental Pollution, 1. Elsevier Scientific Publ. Co.
Gettleson, D.A. and R.E. Putt. 1979. Ecological damage assessment of hard bottom faunal assemblages,
pp. 135-164. In: Proceedings, Ecological Damage Assessment Conference. Sponsored by Society of
Petroleum Industry Biologists
Gettleson, D.A. and R.E. Putt. 1979. Results of a monitoring program for exploratory drilling operations
near the East Flower Garden Bank, Gulf of Mexico. Fla. Acad. Sci. 42 (Suppl. 1).
Gettleson, D.A. 1979. Identification and characterization of hard bottom areas on the Georgia-South
Carolina outer continental shelf. Fla. Acad. Sci. 42 (Suppl. 1).
Gettleson, D.A. 1978. Ecological impact of exploratory drilling: A case study, pp. 93-115.
In: Proceedings, Energy/Environment '78. Sponsored by Society of Petroleum Industry Biologists.
Gettleson, D.A. 1976. An ecological study of the macrofauna and meiofauna of a soft bottom benthic
community on the Texas continental shelf. Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University. 257 pp.
A-56
A-57
A-58
A-59
A-60
A-61
A-62
1
StateofIsrael
MinistryofEnergyand
TheMinistryofEnvironmental
WaterResources
Protection
NaturalResources
Marine andCoastal
Administration
Environment
Division
AppendixA1:
GuidelinesforMarineMonitoringforthePurposeof
StudyingtheEffectsofGasandOilExplorationActivities
ontheMarineEnvironmentintheStateofIsrael
1.
Introduction ....................................................................................................... 2
2.
GeneralMonitoringGuidelines ......................................................................... 2
3.
ThresholdConditionsfortheMonitoringCompany ....................................... 3
4.
PurposesofMarineMonitoring ........................................................................ 4
5.
LimitsoftheMonitoringProgramandLocationofSamplingStations ......... 5
6.
SamplingandMeasuringMethods ................................................................... 5
7.
Maps .................................................................................................................... 6
8.
HydrodynamicRegime ...................................................................................... 6
9.
BiologicalMonitoring ........................................................................................ 6
10.
BiologicalSurveyoftheSeabed ........................................................................ 7
11.
SeawaterCharacteristics ................................................................................... 8
12.
SedimentCharacteristics .................................................................................. 9
13.
AssessmentoftheAreaImpactedbytheActivity ........................................... 9
14.
GuidelinesforWritingaSummaryReport .................................................... 10
OurWebsites:
www.mni.gov.ilwww.sviva.gov.il
A-71
2
1. Introduction
1.1. The"ContinentalShelfExploitation"protocolincludedintheBarcelona
Convention:"ProtocoloftheBarcelonaConventionConcerningthe
ProtectionoftheMediterraneanSeaAgainstPollutionResultingfrom
ExplorationandExploitationoftheContinentalShelfandtheSeabedand
itsSubsoil,1994",cameintoforceinMarch2011.Israelisasignatoryto
thisprotocolandvariousprofessionalpartiesintheStateofIsraelare
nowworkingtoachieveratificationoftheprotocolbytheGovernmentof
Israel.
1.2. ThisprotocolobligatescountriespartytotheConventiontoadjusttheir
licensingmechanismsforenvironmentalaspects,insofarassuch
licensingpertainstopartiesconductingexplorationandproduction
activitiesaimedatexploitingdeepseanaturalresources.
Interalia,partiesconductingorexpectedtoconductsuchactivitiesare
required(Sections5.1.1;Section19,andAppendix14ofsaidprotocol)to
implementmonitoringofenvironmentalimpacts(EIA)foroilandgas
explorationandproductionactivities.Suchmonitoringwillinclude,inter
alia,anup‐to‐datedescriptionofthemarineenvironment(presentstate)
beforesuchactivitiesareperformed.Monitoringwillalsoincludea
descriptionoftheshortandlongtermimpacts(bothdirectandindirect)
ofexpectedactivitiesonmarineecology.
1.3. Explorationandproductionactivitiesmayhavesignificant
environmentalimpactsonthemarineenvironment,andsuchimpacts
willbeconsideredbytheenvironmentaldocumentrequiredinorderto
receiveadrilling/productionlicense.Tothisend,monitoringofthe
marineenvironmentwillbecarriedoutaccordingtothefollowing
detailedinstructionsandsubjecttotheapprovaloftheMinistryof
EnvironmentalProtection.
2. GeneralMonitoringGuidelines
2.1. Theprogramdeveloperswillberesponsibleformonitoringoperations,
andalldocumentspresentedinthecontextofsuchmonitoring
operationswillbearthenameofthepartyresponsiblefortheir
performanceandthenamesoftheprofessionalserviceproviders
involvedintheirperformance.
2.2. Monitoringoperationswillbeperformedbyanexperiencedcompany
specializinginenvironmentalimpactsandmarineresearch.The
companyselectedbytheprogramdeveloperstoperformmonitoring
operationswillprovideproofofatleasttenyearsofexperienceinthis
area.
OurWebsites:
A-72
3
2.3. Intheeventthataninternationalcompanyischosentoperform
monitoringoperations,itwillbeassistedbyateamofIsraeliexpertswith
provenexperienceinthestudyofIsrael'smarineenvironment.The
Israeliteamwillincludeexpertsinthefollowingareas:marineecology,
marinebiology,chemistry,hydrodynamics,sedimentology,geologyand
marinegeophysics.
2.4. Thepartiessubmittingthemonitoringdocuments,theserviceproviders,
andtheexperts,willallencloseaffidavitsasanappendixtothe
monitoringdocument,subjecttoRegulation14(C)ofthe2003Planning
andBuildingLaw–EnvironmentalImpactSurveys.
3. ThresholdConditionsfortheMonitoringCompany
3.1. Professionalsoperatingwithinthemonitoringcompanymustbe
scientistswithadvanceddegrees,suchasPh.DD.Sc.,fromrecognized
universities.Thesescientistswillhavespecializedinascientificarea
relevanttomonitoringinamarineenvironment(marine
biogeochemistry,chemicaloceanography,biologicaloceanography,or
physicaloceanography)andwillbecapableofpresentingproofoftheir
specialization,suchaspeer‐reviewedpublicationsinscientific
periodicals.Suchpublicationsmustdealwithmarineobservationsrather
thanlaboratorytrialsorcomputerizedmodels.Theworkwillbedivided
amonganumberofscientists,eachofwhichwillberesponsibleforhisor
herareaofspecialization(hydrographicinformation,chemistryand
biology)andallscientistswillbejointlyresponsibleforassemblingand
evaluatingthedatainordertoprovideadescriptionofthegeneral
environmentalstatus.Scientistswillberesponsibleforthefollowing
topicswithintheirareaofexpertise:planningmonitoringoperationsand
marinesamplingwork;laboratoryanalysisofsamplesandtheirquality;
writingthemonitoringreport.Thereportauthorwillbeinvolvedinall
aspectsofthemonitoringwork,includingsamplingplanningstagesand
datacollection.
3.2. Thecompanyitselfmusthaveaccesstoalltechnicalmeansrequiredin
ordertoconductmonitoringoperations,andsuchmeanswillbefully
operational.Continuousmeasuringdevices(CTD- conductivity,
temperatureanddensity)mustbecalibratedaccordingtoOEM
instructionswithcertificatesforthepreviousyear(sothatatthetimeof
actualmonitoringnomorethantwoyearshavepassedsincedevice
maintenanceandcalibration).Thecompanywillmaintainspecialized
devices,suchasNiskinbottles,suitableforperformingmarinesampling,
andinsufficientquantitiesforcollectinggas,solutes,andchlorophyll.In
addition,inordertoincreasetheefficiencyofthesamplingprocessand
OurWebsites:
A-73
4
toshortenthedurationofsampling,theuseofadditionalmeansshould
beconsidered,suchasaserviceboatfortransferringsamplestoan
appropriatestorageandpreservationfacility.Generalcareshouldbe
takentousewhateverappropriatesamplingmeansarerequiredinorder
toproducereliableandrepresentativeinformationfromthesampling
process.
3.3. Thecompanymusthavethemeanstopreservesamplestakenfor
laboratoryanalyses(refrigerators,containerswithdryice,andthelike).
3.4. Thecompanywillhavelaboratoriesoraccesstolaboratorieslocatedin
thevicinityofthesamplinglocationandreachablereasonablyquickly
aftersampling,soastoperformanalysesattheprecisionandreliability
levelsappropriatefornaturalenvironmentalconditionsandbasedonthe
requirementsofthemethodsusedtoconducteachanalysis.
Alternatively,ifthesamplingisconductedfromaship,theaffixing,
preservation,andsomeoftheanalysesmaybeperformedonboard.Asa
generalrule,careshouldbetakentomeetallconditionsnecessaryto
obtainpreciseandreliableresults.
3.5. Theprogramwillbesubmittedfortheinspectionandcommentsofthe
PetroleumCommissioner,whowillconsulttheMinistryof
EnvironmentalProtection,theNatureandParksAuthority,andother
parties,asrelevant.
4. PurposesofMarineMonitoring
4.1. Thepurposeofthemonitoringprogramistoprovideinformation
regardingenvironmentalaspectsthatmightbeimpactedbyactivities
relatingtomarinegasandoilexploratorydrillings.Themonitoring
programwillprovideinformationaboutenvironmentalconditions
beforeandafterperformanceoftheexploratorydrillings.
4.2. Themonitoringprogramwillalsoserveasabasisforevaluatingthe
impactoffutureactivitiesaccordingtotwoalternatives:abandonmentof
thedrillsiteoritsconversionintoaproducingwell.
4.3. Environmentalmonitoringwillincludetrackingphysical,chemicaland
biologicalparametersinthewatercolumnandsediment.
4.4. Monitoringwillprovideadvancewarningofpossibledeviationsfrom
acceptedIsraeliandglobalenvironmentalstandardsandcriteria,
includingchangesinthenaturalbackground.
4.5. Monitoringresultswillbeusedbyauthoritiesandbycompanies
operatinginthegasandoilsphere,asinputforinformeddecision
makingregardingallactivitiesperformed,soastoensurethatnodamage
iscausedtothemarineenvironment.
Asummaryreportofthemonitoringprogramwillbepresentedtothe
PetroleumCommissionerattheMinistryofEnergyandWaterResources,and
OurWebsites:
A-74
5
theMarine andCoastal EnvironmentDivisionattheMinistryof
EnvironmentalProtection.Thevariousimplicationsoffindingsmaybe
discussedifnecessary,includingrequiredchangesinthecharacteristicsof
theactivity.
5. LimitsoftheMonitoringProgramandLocationofSampling
Stations
Monitoringlimitswillbedefinedwithconsiderationforthedrillingplanand
anestimationoftheareathatmaybeimpactedbyactivities.Oneshouldtake
monitoringarounddrillingsitesintoaccount,aswellasadditionallocations
usedascontrolsitesinordertoassesstheimpactontheenvironment.
Samplingstationswillbeplacedonthebasisofradialsectionsatfixed
intervalsfromthesource(thefloworigin)of250m.,500m.,1000m.,2000m.,
sothattheentireareaimpactedbythefloworiginiscovered.Inaddition,
controlpointswillbeplacedinawaythatensurestheyareoutofthe
impactedarea,andcontrolpointswillbeestablishedsothattheirphysical
characteristics(depth,granulometrics,etc.)areidenticaltothoseofthe
samplingpoints.
6. SamplingandMeasuringMethods
6.1. Samplingandtestingmethodswillconformtostandardspublishedinthe
latestrevisionof:"StandardMethodsforExaminationofWaterand
Wastewater,"WEF,AWWA,APHA,ortomethodsapprovedbytheEPA
(orsomeotherrecognizedbody),solongastheyaresuitableforthe
measurementofseawaterandconformtoapprovedmethodsof
measuringseawater.Itshouldbespecifiedforeachsamplingmethodand
includedtests,ifitisarecognizedmethod.Specificationofsampling
methodforeachparameterwillincludethefollowing,interalia:typeof
bottle,fixingmaterial,sampling/handlingofsamplesandpreservationof
samples.Sampleswillbetakeninsuchvolumesastoallowrepeated
sedimenttestswhennecessary.
6.2. Thesensitivityofmeasuringmethodswillcorrespondtothebackground
seawaterconcentrationsforallrequiredparameters,andwillalsomeet
thesensitivitythresholdmeasuredinthecontextofnationalmonitoring.
6.3. TestswillbeperformedbyalaboratoryauthorizedbytheIsrael
LaboratoryAccreditationAuthority,includingrequiredtests,orbya
laboratorypre‐approvedbytheMarine andCoastal Environment
Division.
OurWebsites:
A-75
6
6.4. Laboratorytestingwillbeconductedbylaboratoriesspecializinginthe
analysisofseawater.Suchlaboratorieswillhaveaprovenpublished
recordofmarinemeasurements.Interalia,suchlaboratoriesmustmeet
thefollowingcriteria:useofcalibrationsolutionsandseawater
standards;theoperationalrangeofmeasuringinstrumentswillbewithin
therangeofthenaturalseawaterbackground.
6.5. Inordertoreceivepre‐approval,alistofthelaboratoriesintendedtorun
thetestsshouldbesubmittedattheplanproposalstage,basedonalistof
theparametersthatwillbechecked.
6.6. Samplingmethods,samplingtechnique,samplehandlingmethods,
measuringinstruments,measuringmethodsandsensitivity,andthe
numberofiterationsmustallbespecified.Eachelementtobemonitored
mustbespecified:seawater,sediment,andbiota.Samplingmethod
specificationswillbesubmittedduringthedetailedmonitoringprogram
submissionstage,asaconditionforproposalapproval.
6.7. Eachtestwillbeiteratedthreetimesateachsamplingpoint,inorderto
derivestatisticalvariance,orsomeothernumberofiterationspre‐
approvedbytheMarine andCoastal EnvironmentDivision.
6.8. Parametersformeasuringseawaterandsedimentarespecifiedin
Chapters2and3below.
6.9. Oncesamplinghasbeencompleted,samplesmustbepreservedunder
conditionsappropriateforlong‐termstorageifpossible(thosematerials
thatmaybepreservedshouldbenotedintheplanproposal).Thebiotic
monitoringfindingswillbekeptandpreservedforatleast5years.
Seawaterandsedimentsampleswillbekeptaccordingtotheguidelines
oftheauthorizedlaboratorycarryingoutthetests–allinordertoenable
repeattestingifnecessary.
7. Maps
AccordingtoSection1.3ofAppendixA.
8. HydrodynamicRegime
AccordingtoSection1.5ofAppendixA.
9. BiologicalMonitoring
9.1. Presentnaturalvalues(macroandmicroalgae,seaweed,deepcoral
reefs,andsedentary,demersal,andpelagicbiota,aswellasmarine
mammals)withinthemonitoredarea.Informationaboutnaturalvalues
willbebasedonadetailedbiologicalsurveytobeconductedwithinthe
monitoredarea,andoninformationfromprevioussurveysrelatingto
thearea,ifavailable.Thetotalbodyofinformationwillbepresentedin
OurWebsites:
A-76
7
tables,maps,graphs,pictures,andvideos,andwillbeaccompaniedbya
detailednarrativedescriptionofthefindings.
9.2. Providedetailsofthevarioushabitatsincludedinthewatercolumnand
variousseabedenvironments.Provideadetaileddescriptionofthe
animalcommunitiespopulatingeachsuchhabitat,includingcoverage
percentage,andthemostdetailedtaxonomicinformationpossible
(species)regardingtheidentityoforganismswithinthemonitoredarea
(benthiccreatureslivingontheseabedandwithinit).
9.3. Asafollow‐uptotheabovesections,performadetailedanalysisofthe
totalinformationgenerated,accordingtothefollowingtopics:
9.3.1 Identificationofcreaturesdowntothelevelofspeciesorthe
mostdetailedtaxonomiclevelpossible.
9.3.2 Densityofcreatures.
9.3.3 Abundanceofspecies(inthevarioustaxonomygroups).
9.3.4 Speciesdiversity.Selectanappropriateinstrumentfromamong
thevariousaccepteddiversityindices,suchastheShannon‐
Simpsonindex,theWeinerindex(Magurran,2004),etc.,and
presentthereasonsfortheselection.
9.3.5 Mobileandsedentaryspecies.
9.3.6 "Targetspecies":keyspecies,speciesofcommercialvalue,most
commonspecies(breedingseason,layingseason,rangeof
tolerancefordrillingactivities,heavymetalsandorganic
contaminantsintargetspecies).
9.3.7 Classificationofspeciesaccordingtotheirorigin:Mediterranean‐
Atlantic,cosmopolitanspecies(geographicallywidespread),
invasivespecies(LessepsianmigrantsfromtheRedSea,or
others).
10.
BiologicalSurveyoftheSeabed
10.1. Thedetailedsurveyareawillincludethemarineareawithinaradiusof
upto2km.aroundeachofthegasandoilexplorationsites,withinthe
deepseaoppositethenorthernshoresofIsrael.Themarineareawill
includetheseabedandthelayerbelowtheseabed,aswellasmarine
infrastructureandfacilities,ifsucharepresentwithinthisarea.
10.2. Theextendedsurveyareawillincludetheentiremarineareathatmay
beenvironmentallyimpactedbyactivities/accidentsateachofthesites.
Similarlytotheabove,thismarinearea,too,willincludetheseabedand
thelayerbelowtheseabed,aswellasmarineinfrastructureand
facilities,ifsucharepresentwithinthisarea.
10.3. Thesurveywillpresentaninventoryoftheseabedcommunity(ina
table,accordingtoshipcoordinates,depthandtaxonomicaffiliation),a
mapofseabedhabitatcategories,andvideoclips(filmedbyROVor
OurWebsites:
A-77
8
SCUBAdiversusingsubmarinevideowithGPS,tobeshownandkept
duringtheworkandafterit),whichincludeanup‐to‐datedescriptionof
habitats,includingseabed,flora,fauna,habitatdisruptionsandthelike.
Thefollowingtopicswillbecoveredforeachofthesamplingsites:
10.3.1 Theship'scoordinates(bothontheUniversalTransverse
MercatorandtheIsraelTransverseMercator)andtheprecise
depth.
10.3.2 Backgrounddataregardingthesamplingstationasaprofileof
thewatercolumnatthecenterofthestation(includingdepth,
salinity,temperature,andoxygencontent,ifpossible).
10.3.3 Adescriptionofeachhabitatbed,includingitsnature:hard,
soft,mobility,typeofrockorsediment(mineralogy),grain
size,concentrationoforganicmaterial,etc.,andtherelief.The
levelofdetailswillmakeitpossibletodistinguishonehabitat
fromanotherineachoftheareas,atleastaccordingtothe
abovedetails.
10.3.4 Aquantitativedescriptionofthebiotavaluesofthehabitat
bed,suchasbenthicandpelagicfish.
10.3.5 Aquantitativedescriptionofthefloraandfaunainsoil
samplestakenateachsamplingpoint(assampledbyGrab
0.25‐m2,intwoiterationsforeachhabitat).
10.3.6 Adescriptionofvaluesuniquetospecifichabitatsandthe
extentoftheirrarityinthemarineenvironment.
10.3.7 Adescriptionofphenomenauniquetospecifichabitats,such
astheabundanceofcertainspecies,breedingornursery
grounds,ifobserved,speciesdiversity,surfacecoverageor
anyotherelementthatdescribesthehabitat.
10.3.8 Adescriptionofhabitatanthropogenicdisruptionsourcesif
present(outlets,solidwaste,damagetohabitatinfrastructure,
oilandgasinfrastructuresanddischargesintothesea).
10.3.9 Adescriptionoftheimpactofdrillingactivitiesduringthe
explorationstageonhabitatareasduringbothestablishment
andoperation.
11.
SeawaterCharacteristics
11.1. Describeseawaterqualitycharacteristicswithinthemonitoredarea.
Seawaterqualityinformationwillbebasedonadetailedseawater
qualitysurveytobeperformedwithinthemonitoredarea,andonany
otherrelevantinformationavailablefortheareafromprevious
monitoringprogramsandsurveys.Thetotalbodyofinformationwillbe
presentedinmapsandgraphs,andwillbeaccompaniedbyadetailed
narrativedescriptionofthefindings.
OurWebsites:
A-78
9
11.2. Hydrographicprofileswillbesampledatthreedepths(surface,middle
ofwatercolumnandclosetothesediment)inanumberofstations
upstreamanddownstreamrelativetothedrillingrig.Controlstations
upstreamanddownstreamrelativetothedrillingrigwillalsobe
sampled.
11.3. Describetheamountofmaterialsuspendedwithinthewatercolumn.
Turbiditywillbemeasuredatthesurface,inthemiddleofthewater
columnandclosetothesedimentineachofthethreesites.
11.4. Describeclimateconditionsduringsamplingoperations.
11.5. Describethelevelsofchlorophyllwithinthewatercolumninthe
monitoringarea.
11.6. Provideadetaileddescriptionofthechemicalcharacteristicsofthe
watercolumn,basedonthefollowingparameters:dissolvedoxygen,pH,
salinity,temperature,nutrients(analysiswillbecarriedoutsubjectto
theCommissioner'sapprovalofthelaboratory),heavymetalsincluding
barium,titanium,alkenes,radioactiveelementsRa‐228andRa‐226,
PAHs,PCBs.
12.
SedimentCharacteristics
12.1. Provideadetaileddescriptionofthechemicalandgranulometric
characteristicsofthemonitoredareas.
12.2. SedimentwillbesampledwithGrab0.25‐m2.Thedescriptionwillfocus
ongrainsizeandcompositionofthesediment:heavymetalsincluding
bariumandtitanium,TOC,radioactiveelementsRa‐228,Ra‐226,Th‐
228,PAHs,Pb‐210,THC,aswellascomponentsofthesyntheticdrilling
liquid.
12.3. Thesedimentsamplingdeployment(numberandlocationofstations)
willbeapprovedbytheMinistryofEnvironmentalProtectionbefore
execution.
12.4. TheTHCtestdetectionrangewillbe1mg/Lfordrysediment.ThePAH
testdetectionrangeforeachofthetestedparameterswillbeµg/Lfor
drysediment.
12.5. Describethecharacteristicsofmetalsandhydrocarbonsinhard‐bed
biota(ifany)andsoft‐bedbiota,aswellasbiotawithintheseabed
(bivalves,gastropods,crustaceans,polychaeta,andfish).Thescopeof
samplingwillbeapprovedbytheMinistryofEnvironmentalProtection.
13.
AssessmentoftheAreaImpactedbytheActivity
Twoimpactedregionswillbedefinedforeachmonitoredarea:
13.1. Regionofchemicalimpact.
OurWebsites:
A-79
10
13.2. Regionofbiologicalimpact(theregionwheremeasuredchemicaland
biologicalparametersdeviatefromthenaturalbackgroundtypicalfor
thearea).
Areasizewillbecalculatedinkm2.Thecalculationwillbebasedonthe
assumptionthattheimpactedareaisapproximatelyelliptical(owingtothe
area'sdominantcurrents).Thearearadiusdependsonthemaximum
distancealongeachsamplingsectionwhereonecandiscerntheimpact
(deviationfromnaturalbackground).Thecalculationmustbeconservative,
i.e.,themaximumsizeoftheimpactedareamustbedeterminedsuchthatthe
calculatedradiuswillbethedistancebetweentheoutputsourceandthe
pointwherenoimpactisobservedinanyofthetesteddirections.
14.
GuidelinesforWritingaSummaryReport
14.1. Asummaryreportmustbepreparedforallmonitoringactivities
performedbeforetheexplorativedrillingbeginsandafteritis
completed.Thereportmustbesubmittednolaterthanthreemonths
afterthesamplingperformedfollowingdrillcompletion.Thereport
mustbesubmittedtothePetroleumCommissionerandtotheMarine
andCoastal EnvironmentDivisionin5copiesandelectronically.The
summaryreportwillinclude:
14.1.1 Tableofcontents.
14.1.2 AnabstractinHebrewandEnglish,asummaryofthefindings,
adiscussionandrecommendations.
14.1.3 General:Beforedrillingcommences.Thispartwillincludea
narrativedescriptionandspecificationofdrillingand
(planned)transmissiondata–quantitiesandqualities–ona
drawingoftheinstallation.
14.1.4 Achapterdescribingsamplingandmeasuringmethods:
detailsofallin‐situsamplingactivities,handlingand
preservationofsamples,andmeasuringmethods(including
methodnumberandsensitivity)actuallyperformed,including
alistoflaboratories.
14.1.5 Aresultschapter:presentationofalldatacollectedbythe
monitoringprogram:anarrativedescriptionwithlinked
tablesandgraphs.
14.1.6 Detailsregardingseaconditionsonthesamplingdate,listing
individualparameters;windandcurrent(intensityand
direction),waves(heightanddirection).
14.1.7 Dataanalysischapter:
14.1.7.1 Analysisofthedatacollectedinthecourseof
monitoringoperations,including:referencetothe
OurWebsites:
A-80
11
dataitselfandthegeneralenvironmentaltrends
associatedwitheachparameter(ecological,
biological,andphysical‐chemical).
14.1.7.2 Analysisofseawaterqualitydataanditscomparison
withIsraeliandotherenvironmentalstandardsfor
seawater.
14.1.7.3 Analysisofdatarelatingtoheavymetalcontentand
pollutionlevelsinthesediment,anditscomparison
withthecriteriaoftheAmericanNationalOceanic
andAtmosphericAdministration(NOAA)andothers.
14.1.8 Discussionandrecommendations.
14.1.9 Allrawdatawillbeshowintablesandappendedtothereport.
14.1.10 Samplingpointsdatawillbepresentedinthebodyofthe
reportorinanattachedappendix.
14.1.11 Alldatacollectedinthecourseofmonitoringoperationswill
besopresentedastoenableGISreadings,including
bathymetricmapsandsamplepointdata.Intheabsenceof
otherguidelines,monitoringresultswillbepresentedinan
Excelfile.
14.1.12 Theapprovedmonitoringprogramwillbeappendedtothe
report,alongwiththeletterapprovingtheprogram.
Asummaryreportofthemonitoringprogramwillbepresentedtothe
PetroleumCommissionerattheMinistryofEnergyandWaterResources,and
theMarine andCoastal EnvironmentDivisionattheMinistryof
EnvironmentalProtection.Thevariousimplicationsoffindingsmaybe
discussedifnecessary,includingrequiredchangesinthecharacteristicsof
theactivity.
OurWebsites:
A-81
APPENDIX B
Vessel Specifications
B-1
M/V “EDT ARES” – DP II ROV SUPPORT VESSEL
GENERAL INFORMATION
Owner
Managers
Built
Flag
Ship Extended
Call Sign
Classification
IMO Number
MMSI Number
GL Registration Number
Operation
Endurance
Maximum Speed
Phileas Shipmanagement Co. Ltd.
EDT Shipmanagement Ltd
1999, Northern Shipyard, Gdansk, Poland
Cyprus
2002, Navy Shipyard, Gdynia, Poland
P3MJ8
GL + 100A5E3 DPII + MC AUT E3 ICE CLASS
9130755
212858000
91300
World Wide
40 Days
13.5 knots
DIMENSIONS
Gross Tonnage
Net Tonnage
Deadweight
Length Overall
Breadth Moulded
Depth to Main Deck
Draft
1,728
518
1,015.61
80.75 m
13.40 m
5.50 m
4.30 m
TANK CAPACITIES
Marine Diesel
Fresh Water
479 m3 @ 95%
417 m3 + Water Maker 9 m3 / day.
B-2
DP SYSTEM
DP System
GL Notation
Portable Joystick
Differential GPS Reference systems
Gyro’s
VRU’s
Alstom DPS 902 Duplex
‘Dynpos Autr’ (Class II)
Alstom (Converteam)
3 x DGPS
1 x Veripos Dual frequency LHD2-G2 (high accuracy capable <30cm) DGPS system
c/w Verify DP Marine QC display & Veripos Lid3S receiver intergrated
2 x Dual frequency StarPack (high accuracy cpable <30cm) Receivers
1 x Dual frequncy C-Nav 2050 (high accuracy cpable <30cm) Receiver
1 x Sonardyne Dimona USBL Acoustic System
1 x Sonardyne Fusion USBL Acoustic System (One Acoustic Pole)
1 x Cy Scan Mk 4 Position Sensor
1 x Alstom Taut Wire (TW901) (500 m)
1 x Anschütz Std20 & 2 Anschutz Std22 Gyro’s
1 x RM Young Ultrasonic amemometer
1 x RM Young anemometer
1x TSS Teledyne DMS 10
1x TSS Teledyne RP 25
Plug & Play available in the survey room(Diff,Gyro & Acoustics)
DECK EQUIPMENT
Deck Loading
Deck Area
Under Deck Hold
Towing Winch
Electric Power on Deck
5T / m²
430 m2 Clear Deck (13 m x 33 m)
7 m x 12 m with 2.70 m Height - (84 m2)
Norwinch TUD/26/120 with 30 Tonne Line Pull, 1200 m x 26 mm wire
While on DP: 600 kW, 440 V, 60 HZ
DECK CRANES & A-FRAME
Hydramarine Knuckle Boom Crane
Hydralift Stiff Boom
A – Frame
Capstains on Main Deck
Starboard Aft - dyn.fact. 1.3
- SWL 30T @ 10m.
- SWL 20T @ 15m.
- SWL 12T @ 20m.
Port Midships
- SWL 10T @ 15m.
- SWL 15T @ 10m.
Hydraulic – 25 Tons SWL
2x Ulstein (Brattvaag) Fixed warping Head 24mm x 450mm Hydraulic 5 T pull.
PROPULSION/MACHINERY
Main Engines
Shaft Generators
Emergency& Auxiliary Generators
Total Electrical Power
Bow Thrusters
Stern Thrusters
2 x Wartsila 8L20 1,320 kW each Connected to Single CPP Propeller in Kortnozzle.
2 x 1,100 kW each
2 x Caterpillar 3306 x 150 kW each
4,700 kW of 440 V 60 HZ
1 x Brunvoll Tunnel @ 600 kW
1 x Brunvoll Retractable Azimuth @ 710 kW
2 x Brunvoll Tunnel @ 450 kW
B-3
ACCOMMODATION
Total Accommodation
Single Cabins with en-suite
Double Cabins with en-suite
Double Cabins with shared facilities
4-Berth Cabins with shared facilities
49 Persons (As per Safety Certificate)
2
4
16
2
Other Facilities
Hospital Room – (Single cabin with en-suite)
Recreation Room
Sauna
Gym
Survey Room 70m²
Laundry Room
SAT TV
TeamTec OG 120 C
Hamworthy ST2A
The Vessel is fully Air Conditioned.
Incinerator
Sewage Treatment Plant
NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT
Navigation System
Radars
SAM Electronic:Nacos xx-5 Intergrated navigation system comprissing off;
Chart Pilot
AIS
Gyro Compass
1x SAM Electronic Mulipilot 1100 ( S Band Radar) ECDIS
1x SAM Electronic Mulipilot 1100 (X Band Radar) ECDIS
1x SAM Electronic Chartradar Ind 3 (X orS Band)ECDIS aft conning station
1 x SAM Electronic Chartpilot 1100 ECDIS Workstation
1x SAM Electronic Trackpilot/Conning Pilot 1100
Integrated into the Nacos
1 x Anschütz Std 20 & 2 Anschutz Std22 & TMC
Navtex
Doppler Log
GPS (NACOS Navigation System)
Furuno NX - 700
DEBEG STN Atlas
DEBEG 4412 B & Simrad MX10 CDU with MX521A DGPS Antenna
COMMUNICATIONS
Radio Transeivers MF/HF
DSC Decoders
VHF
Broadband Sat Com Sailor
Inmarsat C
V-Sat
DEBEG 3105
DEBEG
2 x DEBEG 6322 & slave Debeg 6301 CU
Voice, Fax and Data
Telex Debeg 3220C
Caprock Voice & Email
GMDSS installation in accordance with IMO regulations for vessels operating within Sea Area A1, A2 and A3.
The specifications listed on this data sheet are subject to change without notice and cannot be used for contractual purposes.
Up-to-date configurations and specifications will be supplied on request.
All details without guarantee.
(28.02.2012)
B-4
APPENDIX C
Seawater Total Metals Analytical Data Sheets
C-1
C-2
C-3
APPENDIX D
Seawater Hydrocarbons Analytical Data Sheets
D-1
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
CSA Ocean Sciences Inc 2560 Israel Project
Aliphatic Hydrocarbon and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon Data
Client Submitted Samples
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
Dilution
CSA2106.D
P-W3/13-TF1-bottom
Water
03/25/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
Q
<0.285
<0.249
<0.248
<0.264
<0.256
<0.254
<0.274
<0.232
<0.254
<0.232
<0.099
<0.172
<0.188
<0.099
<0.199
<0.073
<0.076
<0.08
<0.148
<0.116
<0.068
<0.065
<0.07
<0.068
<0.076
<0.086
<0.08
<0.125
<0.082
<0.279
<0.105
<0.111
<0.112
<0.147
<0.126
<0.159
<0.142
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
<0.297
<0.259
<0.259
<0.275
<0.266
<0.264
<0.285
<0.241
<0.264
<0.241
<0.103
<0.179
<0.196
<0.103
<0.207
<0.076
<0.08
<0.083
<0.154
<0.121
<0.071
<0.068
<0.072
<0.071
<0.079
<0.09
<0.083
<0.13
<0.085
<0.291
<0.11
<0.115
<0.117
<0.153
<0.131
<0.165
<0.148
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2109.D
P-W3/13-TF4-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
Q
<0.285
<0.249
<0.248
<0.264
<0.256
<0.254
<0.274
<0.232
<0.254
<0.232
<0.099
<0.172
<0.188
<0.099
<0.199
<0.073
<0.076
<0.08
<0.148
<0.116
<0.068
<0.065
<0.07
<0.068
<0.076
<0.086
<0.08
<0.125
<0.082
<0.279
<0.105
<0.111
<0.112
<0.147
<0.126
<0.159
<0.142
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
<0.297
<0.259
<0.259
<0.275
<0.266
<0.264
<0.285
<0.241
<0.264
<0.241
<0.103
<0.179
<0.196
<0.103
<0.207
<0.076
<0.08
<0.083
<0.154
<0.121
<0.071
<0.068
<0.072
<0.071
<0.079
<0.09
<0.083
<0.13
<0.085
<0.291
<0.11
<0.115
<0.117
<0.153
<0.131
<0.165
<0.148
U
U
<12.9 U
<12.9 U
<12.9 U
<13.4 U
<13.4 U
<13.4 U
<12.9 U
<12.9 U
<12.9 U
<13.4 U
<13.4 U
<13.4 U
386
371
149
124
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
84
93
95
65
91
94
75
93
95
68
94
96
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
EOM (Pg/L)
Surrogate (Su)
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
CSA2108.D
P-W3/13-TF3-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
U
Total Alkanes
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Total Resolved Hydrocarbons
Unresolved Complex Mixture
CSA2107.D
P-W3/13-TF2-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
D-2
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
Dilution
CSA2110.D
P-W3/13-TF5-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
Q
<0.291
<0.254
<0.253
<0.269
<0.261
<0.259
<0.279
<0.237
<0.259
<0.237
<0.101
<0.175
<0.192
<0.101
<0.203
<0.074
<0.078
<0.081
<0.151
<0.118
<0.069
<0.066
<0.071
<0.069
<0.078
<0.088
<0.082
<0.127
<0.084
<0.285
<0.107
<0.113
<0.114
<0.149
<0.128
<0.162
<0.145
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2112.D
P-W3/13-TF7-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
Q
<0.288
<0.252
<0.251
<0.266
<0.258
<0.256
<0.277
<0.234
<0.256
<0.234
<0.1
<0.174
<0.19
<0.1
<0.201
<0.073
<0.077
<0.081
<0.15
<0.117
<0.069
<0.066
<0.07
<0.069
<0.077
<0.087
<0.081
<0.126
<0.083
<0.282
<0.106
<0.112
<0.113
<0.148
<0.127
<0.16
<0.144
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2113.D
P-W3/13-TF8-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
Q
<0.294
<0.257
<0.256
<0.272
<0.264
<0.262
<0.282
<0.239
<0.262
<0.239
<0.102
<0.177
<0.194
<0.102
<0.205
<0.075
<0.079
<0.082
<0.153
<0.119
<0.07
<0.067
<0.072
<0.07
<0.079
<0.089
<0.083
<0.128
<0.084
<0.288
<0.108
<0.114
<0.115
<0.151
<0.13
<0.164
<0.147
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
<0.283
<0.247
<0.246
<0.261
<0.253
<0.251
<0.271
<0.23
<0.251
<0.23
<0.098
<0.17
<0.186
<0.098
<0.197
<0.072
<0.076
<0.079
<0.147
<0.115
<0.067
<0.064
<0.069
<0.067
<0.076
<0.086
<0.079
<0.123
<0.081
<0.276
<0.104
<0.109
<0.111
<0.145
<0.125
<0.157
<0.141
U
U
U
<13.1 U
<13.1 U
<13.1 U
<13 U
<13 U
<13 U
<13.3 U
<13.3 U
<13.3 U
<12.8 U
<12.8 U
<12.8 U
184
382
EOM (Pg/L)
91 J
180
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
70
92
95
70
91
94
70
89
92
72
89
92
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Total Alkanes
Surrogate (Su)
CSA2111.D
P-W3/13-TF6-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
D-3
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
Dilution
CSA2114.D
P-W3/13-TF9-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/18/13
ALIBACK.M
1.0
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJ/
Q
<0.297
<0.259
<0.259
<0.275
<0.266
<0.264
<0.285
<0.241
<0.264
<0.241
<0.103
<0.179
<0.196
<0.103
<0.207
<0.076
<0.08
<0.083
<0.154
<0.121
<0.071
<0.068
<0.072
<0.071
<0.079
<0.09
<0.083
<0.13
<0.085
<0.291
<0.11
<0.115
<0.117
<0.153
<0.131
<0.165
<0.148
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
U
Total Alkanes
<13.4 U
<13.4 U
<13.4 U
EOM (Pg/L)
Surrogate (Su)
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
247
Su Recovery (%)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
81
94
97
D-4
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
2560 Israel Project
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Data
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2106.D
P-W3/13-TF1-bottom
Water
03/25/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
C1-Phenanthrenes/Anthracenes
Dibenzothiophene
C1-Dibenzothiophenes
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
C1-Fluoranthenes/Pyrenes
Naphthobenzothiophene
C1-Naphthobenzothiophenes
Benz(a)anthracene
Chrysene/Triphenylene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(a)fluoranthene
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
Total PAHs
18.7
19.4
<2.3
<2.3
<2.3
6.79
2.14
<5.8
<5.8
<5.8
<1.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
1.00
<1.2
<1.4
<1.2
0.421
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<0.8
<0.8
1.45
<0.7
<3
<3
<3
<0.8
<0.7
<1.3
<1.3
<1.3
<1.1
<1.4
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.7
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.4
<2.5
<2.5
<2.7
<1.9
<0.6
<1.4
<1.1
<2.5
49.9
CSA2107.D
P-W3/13-TF2-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
19.7
17.3
<2.4
<2.4
<2.4
5.25
2.18
<6
<6
<6
<1.3
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
0.860
<1.2
<1.5
<1.2
0.390
<1.7
<1.7
<1.7
<0.9
<0.8
1.57
<0.7
<3.1
<3.1
<3.1
<0.8
<0.7
<1.4
<1.4
<1.4
<1.1
0.509
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.8
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.5
<2.6
<2.6
<2.8
<2
<0.7
<1.4
<1.2
<2.6
47.7
CSA2108.D
P-W3/13-TF3-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
21.7
18.9
<2.3
<2.3
<2.3
5.01
1.95
<5.8
<5.8
<5.8
<1.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
0.825
<1.2
<1.4
<1.2
0.368
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<0.8
<0.8
1.06
<0.7
<3
<3
<3
<0.8
<0.7
<1.3
<1.3
<1.3
<1.1
0.247
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.7
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.4
<2.5
<2.5
<2.7
<1.9
<0.6
<1.4
<1.1
<2.5
50.1
CSA2109.D
P-W3/13-TF4-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
26.1
21.0
<2.4
<2.4
<2.4
6.32
2.50
<6
<6
<6
<1.3
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
1.10
<1.2
<1.5
<1.2
0.37
<1.7
<1.7
<1.7
<0.9
<0.8
1.15
<0.7
<3.1
<3.1
<3.1
<0.8
<0.7
<1.4
<1.4
<1.4
<1.1
0.347
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.8
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.5
<2.6
<2.6
<2.8
<2
<0.7
<1.4
<1.2
<2.6
58.8
CSA2110.D
P-W3/13-TF5-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
28.2
23.1
<2.3
<2.3
<2.3
7.49
2.55
<5.9
<5.9
<5.9
<1.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
1.10
<1.2
<1.5
<1.2
0.42
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<0.8
<0.8
1.20
<0.7
<3.1
<3.1
<3.1
<0.8
<0.7
<1.4
<1.4
<1.4
<1.1
0.340
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.7
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.4
<2.5
<2.5
<2.7
<1.9
<0.6
<1.4
<1.1
<2.5
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
64.3
D-5
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
2560 Israel Project
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2106.D
P-W3/13-TF1-bottom
Water
03/25/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2107.D
P-W3/13-TF2-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2108.D
P-W3/13-TF3-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2109.D
P-W3/13-TF4-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2110.D
P-W3/13-TF5-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
Q
Individual Alkyl Isomers and Hopanes
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
2,6-Dimethylnaphthalene
1,6,7-Trimethylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
4-Methyldibenzothiophene
2/3-Methyldibenzothiophene
3-Methylphenanthrene
2-Methylanthracene
4/9-Methylphenanthrene
3,6-Dimethylphenanthrene
Retene
2-Methylfluoranthene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
2.19
1.32
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<1.7
<1.6
<1.1
<1.4
<8.2
<8.2
<8.2
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
2.45
1.12
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1.7
<1.6
<1.2
<1.4
<8.4
<8.4
<8.4
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.11
1.08
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<1.7
<1.6
<1.1
<1.4
<8.2
<8.2
<8.2
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.73
1.36
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1.7
<1.6
<1.2
<1.4
<8.4
<8.4
<8.4
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.74
1.43
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<1.7
<1.6
<1.2
<1.4
<8.3
<8.3
<8.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
82
90
85
92
88
75
85
81
87
86
81
90
87
81
86
78
86
81
84
86
77
85
80
82
83
D-6
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
2560 Israel Project
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2111.D
P-W3/13-TF6-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
CSA2112.D
P-W3/13-TF7-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
26.7
22.8
<2.3
<2.3
<2.3
6.17
2.72
<5.8
<5.8
<5.8
<1.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
1.28
<1.2
<1.4
1.74
1.58
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<0.8
3.09
14.7
<0.7
<3
<3
<3
<0.8
<0.7
<1.3
<1.3
<1.3
21.5
17.7
8.80
2.43
1.30
<2.5
<1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
13.1
9.57
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
12.9
5.39
2.02
7.45
10.1
4.01
4.78
1.48
5.80
209
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
18.8
16.1
<2.3
<2.3
<2.3
5.45
2.10
<5.9
<5.9
<5.9
<1.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
1.09
<1.2
<1.5
<1.2
0.41
<1.7
<1.7
<1.7
<0.9
<0.8
1.08
<0.7
<3.1
<3.1
<3.1
<0.8
<0.7
<1.4
<1.4
<1.4
<1.1
0.200
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.8
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.4
<2.6
<2.6
<2.7
<2
<0.6
<1.4
<1.2
<2.6
45.2
CSA2113.D
P-W3/13-TF8-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
24.2
20.4
<2.3
<2.3
<2.3
6.04
2.30
<5.8
<5.8
<5.8
<1.3
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
1.00
<1.2
<1.4
<1.2
0.48
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<0.8
<0.8
1.37
<0.7
<3
<3
<3
<0.8
<0.7
<1.3
<1.3
<1.3
<1.1
0.284
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.7
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.4
<2.5
<2.5
<2.7
<1.9
<0.6
<1.4
<1.1
<2.5
56.0
CSA2114.D
P-W3/13-TF9-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
23.1
17.6
<2.4
<2.4
<2.4
5.60
2.11
<6
<6
<6
<1.3
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
0.88
<1.2
<1.5
<1.2
<0.8
<1.7
<1.7
<1.7
<0.9
<0.8
1.01
<0.7
<3.1
<3.1
<3.1
<0.8
<0.7
<1.4
<1.4
<1.4
<1.1
0.186
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<2.5
<1.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<2.1
<0.8
<0.8
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<1.6
<2.5
<2.6
<2.6
<2.8
<2
<0.7
<1.4
<1.2
<2.6
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
50.4
D-7
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3031
2560 Israel Project
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Volume (L)
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2111.D
P-W3/13-TF6-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2112.D
P-W3/13-TF7-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2113.D
P-W3/13-TF8-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
CSA2114.D
P-W3/13-TF9-bottom
Water
03/26/13
04/09/13
04/12/13
ENV 3000
04/23/13
PAH-2012.M
1.0
NA
NA
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/L)
Q
Individual Alkyl Isomers and Hopan
2.88
1.57
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<1.7
<1.6
0.99
2.64
<8.2
<8.2
<8.2
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
2.23
1.21
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1.7
<1.6
<1.2
<1.4
<8.4
<8.4
<8.4
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.43
1.33
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<0.9
<1.7
<1.6
<1.1
<1.4
<8.2
<8.2
<8.2
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
<2.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.30
1.16
<0.7
<0.7
<1.5
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1
<1.7
<1.6
<1.2
<1.4
<8.4
<8.4
<8.4
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
<2.7
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
79
87
84
86
86
81
88
84
82
84
85
92
88
91
89
84
93
87
87
90
D-8
APPENDIX E
Seawater and Sediment Radionuclide Analytical Data Sheets
E-1
Radium-228
Case Narrative
CSA International, Inc.
Israel -- 2560
Work Order Number: 1304112
1. This report consists of analytical results for nine water samples received by ALS on 04/08/2013.
2. These samples were prepared according to the current revision of SOP 749.
3. The samples were analyzed for the presence of 228Ra by low background gas flow proportional
counting of 228Ac, which is the ingrown progeny of 228Ra, according to the current revision of SOP
724. The analyses were completed on 04/19/2013.
4. The analysis results for these samples are reported in units of pCi/L. The samples were not
filtered prior to analysis.
5. Due to uncertainty associated with the ICP-AES determination of barium concentration in the
samples, the calculated yield for samples 1304112-12, -12DUP, -15, and RA130416-1LCS fell
between 100% and 110%. To minimize the potential for low bias, results have been calculated
conservatively assuming quantitative chemical yield (100%). The magnitude of the low bias is
estimated to be less than 10% of the reported value and is acceptable according the ALS LQAP.
These samples are identified with an “Y1” flag on the final reports.
6. No further anomalous situations were noted during the preparation and analysis of these
samples. All remaining quality control criteria were met.
1 of 21
E-2
The data contained in the following report have been reviewed and approved by the personnel listed
below. In addition, ALS certifies that the analyses reported herein are true, complete and correct
within the limits of the methods employed.
______________________________
Jean Anderson
Radiochemistry Primary Data Reviewer
__4/23/13___
Date
______________________________
Radiochemistry Final Data Reviewer
___________
4/25/13
Date
2 of 21
E-3
ALS Environmental -- FC
Sample Number(s) Cross-Reference Table
OrderNum:
Client Name:
Client Project Name:
Client Project Number:
Client PO Number:
1304112
Israel
2560
Client Sample
Number
P-S3/13-TF1-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF2-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF3-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF4-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF5-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF6-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13TF7-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF8-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF9-Ra226/228, Th228
P-W3/13-TF1-bottom-Ra226/228,
P-W-3/13-TF3-bottom-Ra226/228
P-W3/13-TF5-bottomRa226/228
P-W3/13-TF9-bottom-Ra226/228
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample
Number
COC Number
1304112-1
1304112-2
1304112-3
1304112-4
1304112-5
1304112-6
1304112-7
1304112-8
1304112-9
1304112-10
1304112-11
1304112-12
1304112-13
1304112-14
1304112-15
1304112-16
1304112-17
1304112-18
Matrix
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
Date
Time
Collected Collected
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
Date Printed: Tuesday, April 23, 2013
LIMS Version: 6.641
3 of 21
E-4
4 of 21
E-5
5 of 21
E-6
6 of 21
E-7
7 of 21
E-8
8 of 21
E-9
Radium-228 Analysis by GFPC
PAI 724 Rev 11
Method
PAI 724
Blank
RevResults
11
Lab Name: ALS Environmental -- FC
Client Name: CSA International, Inc.
ClientProject ID: Israel 2560
Sample Matrix: WATER
Prep SOP: SOP749 Rev 1
Date Collected: 16-Apr-13
Date Prepared: 16-Apr-13
Date Analyzed: 19-Apr-13
Lab ID: RA130416-1MB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Prep Batch: RA130416-1
QCBatchID: RA130416-1-1
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Count Time: 120 minutes
Result +/- 2 s TPU
-0.03 +/- 0.23
Final Aliquot: 1500 ml
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAA0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.53
1
U
Chemical Yield Summary
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32650
32020
ug
98.1
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
U - Result is less than the sample specific MDC.
TPU - Total Propagated Uncertainty
Y1 - Chemical Yield is in control at 100-110%. Quantitative Yield is assumed.
MDC - Minimum Detectable Concentration
Y2 - Chemical Yield outside default limits.
BDL - Below Detection Limit
LT - Result is less than Requested MDC, greater than sample specific MDC.
M - Requested MDC not met.
B - Analyte concentration greater than MDC.
B3 - Analyte concentration greater than MDC but less than Requested MDC.
Data Package ID: RA1304112-1
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.641
9 of 21
E-10
PAI 724 Rev 11
Laboratory Control Sample(s)
Lab ID: RA130416-1LCS
CASNO
15262-20-1
Target
Nuclide
Run ID: RA130416-1A
MDC
Spike Added
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAA0419A
% Rec Control
Limits
Results +/- 2 s TPU
Ra-228
10.7 +/- 2.6
0.7
9.997
107
70 - 130
Lab
Qualifier
P,Y1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Flag
BARIUM
32660
32750
ug
100
40 - 110 %
Y1
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
L - LCS Recovery below lower control limit.
H - LCS Recovery above upper control limit.
P - LCS Recovery within control limits.
M - The requested MDC was not met.
M3 - The requested MDC was not met, but thereported
activity is greater than the reported MDC.
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.641
10 of 21
E-11
PAI 724 Rev 11
Duplicate Sample Results (DER)
Field ID: P-W-3/13-TF3-bottom-Ra22
Lab ID: 1304112-12DUP
CASNO
Analyte
15262-20-1
Date Collected: 26-Mar-13
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Report Basis: Unfiltered
Sample
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Ra-228
0.08 +/- 0.22
Prep Basis: Unfiltered
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
Duplicate
MDC
Flags
0.49
Y1,U
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.09 +/- 0.20
MDC
Flags
0.44
Y1,U
DER
DER
Lim
0.0522
2.13
Comments:
Duplicate Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Y1 - Chemical Yield is in control at 100-110%. Quantitative yield is assumed.
DER - Duplicate Error Ratio
W - DER is greater than Warning Limit of 1.42
NR - Not Reported
D - DER is greater than Control Limit of 2.13
LT - Result is less than Request MDC, greater than sample specific MDC
M3 - The requested MDC was not met, but the reported
P - LCS, Matrix Spike Recovery within control limits.
N - Matrix Spike Recovery outside control limits
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.641
11 of 21
E-12
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Field ID: P-W3/13-TF1-bottom-Ra22
Lab ID: 1304112-10
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.20 +/- 0.23
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.48
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32670
32510
ug
99.5
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
12 of 21
E-13
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-11
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.21 +/- 0.22
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.46
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32670
32490
ug
99.5
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 2 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
13 of 21
E-14
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-12
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.08 +/- 0.22
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.49
1
Y1,U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Flag
BARIUM
32670
32760
ug
100
40 - 110 %
Y1
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 3 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
14 of 21
E-15
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Duplicate Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-12DUP
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.09 +/- 0.20
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.44
1
Y1,U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Flag
BARIUM
32670
32770
ug
100
40 - 110 %
Y1
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
M3 - The requested MDC was not met, but thereported activity is greater than the reported MDC.
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.641
15 of 21
E-16
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-13
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
-0.03 +/- 0.21
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.48
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32660
31830
ug
97.4
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 4 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
16 of 21
E-17
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Field ID: P-W3/13-TF5-bottomRa226
Lab ID: 1304112-14
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.33 +/- 0.28
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAB0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.57
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32670
27740
ug
84.9
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 5 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
17 of 21
E-18
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-15
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.11 +/- 0.25
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAA0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.56
1
Y1,U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Flag
BARIUM
32670
32730
ug
100
40 - 110 %
Y1
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 6 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
18 of 21
E-19
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-16
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
-0.01 +/- 0.25
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAA0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.57
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32830
31540
ug
96.1
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 7 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
19 of 21
E-20
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-17
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.01 +/- 0.26
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAA0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.59
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32670
32360
ug
99.1
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 8 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
20 of 21
E-21
PAI 724 Rev 11
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-18
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: RA130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.05 +/- 0.25
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
File Name: RAA0419
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.57
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
32670
31790
ug
97.3
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 9 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.641
21 of 21
E-22
Radium-226
Case Narrative
Israel -- 2560
1. This report consists of analytical results for nine water samples and nine sediment samples
received by ALS on 04/08/2013.
2. These samples were prepared and analyzed according to the current revisions of SOP 783
and SOP 736 for the sediment samples. The analyses were completed on 04/24/2013.
3. The analysis results for the sediment samples are reported on a ‘Dry Weight’ basis in units
of pCi/gram. The analysis results for the water samples are reported in units of pCi/L. The
water samples were not filtered prior to analysis.
4. At the time of transfer, the sediment samples had moderate amounts of precipitate and/or solids
present. This could potentially bias the gross counts low. Data quality is not believed to be
significantly affected and is submitted without further qualification.
5. ALS uses the following convention for reporting significant digits in the TPU and MDC
results. The TPU value is rounded to two significant digits. The MDC value is rounded to the
same decimal place as the TPU value. In practice, this could result in an MDC reported
value of zero for samples with significant activity, including the batch laboratory control
sample.
6. No anomalous situations were encountered during the preparation or analysis of these
samples. All quality control criteria were met.
1 of 33
E-23
______________________________
Jean Anderson
__4/25/13___
Date
______________________________
04/25/13
___________
Date
2 of 33
E-24
OrderNum:
Client Name:
Client PO Number:
1304112
Israel
2560
Client Sample
Number
P-S3/13-TF1-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF2-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF3-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF4-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF5-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF6-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13TF7-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF8-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF9-Ra226/228, Th228
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample
Number
COC Number
1304112-1
1304112-2
1304112-3
1304112-4
1304112-5
1304112-6
1304112-7
1304112-8
1304112-9
1304112-10
1304112-11
1304112-12
1304112-13
1304112-14
1304112-15
1304112-16
1304112-17
1304112-18
Matrix
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
Date
Time
Collected Collected
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
Date Printed: Thursday, April 25, 2013
LIMS Version: 6.642
3 of 33
E-25
4 of 33
E-26
5 of 33
E-27
6 of 33
E-28
7 of 33
E-29
8 of 33
E-30
Ra-226 by Radon Emanation - Method 903.1
PAI 783 Rev 10
Method
PAI 783
Blank
RevResults
10
Sample Matrix: SEDIMENT
Prep SOP: PAI 783 Rev 10
Lab ID: RE130410-2MB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
13982-63-3
Ra-226
Prep Batch: RE130410-2
QCBatchID: RE130410-2-1
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0 +/- 0.12
Final Aliquot: 1.50 g
Result Units: pCi/g
File Name: Manual Entry
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.24
1
U
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Data Package ID: RE1304112-1
Page 2 of 2
LIMS Version: 6.642
9 of 33
E-31
PAI 783 Rev 10
Method
PAI 783
Blank
RevResults
10
Lab ID: RE130416-1MB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
13982-63-3
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.031 +/- 0.077
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.116
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15390
15000
ug
97.5
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 2
LIMS Version: 6.642
10 of 33
E-32
PAI 783 Rev 10
Lab ID: RE130410-2LCS
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target
Nuclide
Run ID: RE130410-2A
MDC
Spike Added
Result Units: pCi/g
% Rec Control
Limits
Results +/- 2 s TPU
Ra-226
29.9 +/- 5.5
0.2
29.99
99.6
Lab
Qualifier
57 - 126
P
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 2
LIMS Version: 6.642
11 of 33
E-33
PAI 783 Rev 10
Lab ID: RE130416-1LCS
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target
Nuclide
Run ID: RE130416-1A
MDC
Spike Added
Result Units: pCi/l
% Rec Control
Limits
Results +/- 2 s TPU
Ra-226
49 +/- 12
0
44.99
108
Lab
Qualifier
67 - 120
P
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15390
13460
ug
87.4
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 2 of 2
LIMS Version: 6.642
12 of 33
E-34
PAI 783 Rev 10
Matrix Spike Results
Field ID: P-S3/13-TF4-Ra226/228, T
Lab ID: 1304112-4MS
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Report Basis: Dry Weight
Prep Basis: Dry Weight
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
CASNO
Target
Nuclide
Matrix
Spike
Sample
Results
MDC
Spike
Added
% Rec
Control
Limits
13982-63-3
Ra-226
25.6
0.27
0.2
29.1
87.1
57 - 126
Lab
Qualifier
P
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Y1 - Chemical Yield in control at 100-110%. Quantitative yield is assumed.
P - Matrix Spike Recovery within control limits
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.642
13 of 33
E-35
PAI 783 Rev 10
Lab ID: 1304112-6DUP
CASNO
Analyte
13982-63-3
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Sample
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Ra-226
0.35 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
Duplicate
MDC
Flags
0.13
LT
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.37 +/- 0.18
MDC
Flags
0.13
LT
DER
DER
Lim
0.0818
2.13
Comments:
Abbreviations:
NR - Not Reported
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.642
14 of 33
E-36
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-1
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.42 +/- 0.21
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.18
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
15 of 33
E-37
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-2
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.45 +/- 0.20
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.13
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 2 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
16 of 33
E-38
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-3
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.21 +/- 0.14
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.16
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 3 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
17 of 33
E-39
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-4
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.27 +/- 0.20
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.27
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 4 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
18 of 33
E-40
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-5
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.39 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.12
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 5 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
19 of 33
E-41
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-6
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.35 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.13
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 6 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
20 of 33
E-42
PAI 783 Rev 10
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
CASNO
Target Nuclide
13982-63-3
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.37 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.13
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.642
21 of 33
E-43
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Field ID: P-S3/13TF7-Ra226/228, Th
Lab ID: 1304112-7
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.29 +/- 0.17
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.17
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 7 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
22 of 33
E-44
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-8
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.52 +/- 0.22
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.14
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 8 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
23 of 33
E-45
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-9
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130410-2A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.27 +/- 0.17
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.18
1
LT
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 9 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
24 of 33
E-46
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-10
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.11 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.30
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15380
14350
ug
93.3
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 10 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
25 of 33
E-47
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-11
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.11 +/- 0.15
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.24
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15380
14250
ug
92.6
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 11 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
26 of 33
E-48
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-12
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.16 +/- 0.15
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.19
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15390
14350
ug
93.2
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 12 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
27 of 33
E-49
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-13
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.06 +/- 0.14
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.26
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15390
14370
ug
93.3
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 13 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
28 of 33
E-50
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-14
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.10 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.31
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15380
14400
ug
93.6
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 14 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
29 of 33
E-51
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-15
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.11 +/- 0.18
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.30
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15400
14470
ug
94.0
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 15 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
30 of 33
E-52
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-16
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.06 +/- 0.19
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.37
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15390
14210
ug
92.3
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 16 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
31 of 33
E-53
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-17
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.03 +/- 0.16
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.33
1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15410
14650
ug
95.1
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 17 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
32 of 33
E-54
PAI 783 Rev 10
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-18
CASNO
13982-63-3
Target Nuclide
Ra-226
Run ID: RE130416-1A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.31 +/- 0.21
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/l
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.19
1
LT
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
BARIUM
15410
14420
ug
93.6
40 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 18 of 18
LIMS Version: 6.642
33 of 33
E-55
Gamma Spectroscopy
Case Narrative
Israel -- 2560
1. This report consists of analytical results for nine sediment samples received by ALS on 4/8/13.
2. These samples were prepared according to the current revision of SOP 739.
3. The samples were analyzed for the presence of gamma emitting radionuclides according to the
current revision of SOP 713. The analyses were completed on 4/15/13.
4. The analysis results for these samples are reported on a “Dry Weight” basis in units of pCi/gram.
5. There are cases where the sample density is less than the associated calibration standard
density. Cases that exceed the limit of +/- 15% of the density of the calibration standard are
flagged with a ‘G’, denoting a significant density difference between the sample and calibration
standard. Consequently, the results may be biased high for the flagged results in this work order.
If requested, ALS can perform a transmission spike in order to estimate a magnitude of this bias.
The results are reported without further qualification.
6. No further problems were encountered with either the client samples or the associated quality
control samples. All remaining quality control criteria were met.
E-56
1 of 22
_______________________________
Linda Arend
__4/18/13___
Date
_______________________________
____________
04/25/13
Date
E-57
2 of 22
OrderNum:
Client Name:
Client PO Number:
1304112
Israel
2560
Client Sample
Number
P-S3/13-TF1-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF2-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF3-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF4-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF5-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF6-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13TF7-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF8-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF9-Ra226/228, Th228
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample
Number
COC Number
1304112-1
1304112-2
1304112-3
1304112-4
1304112-5
1304112-6
1304112-7
1304112-8
1304112-9
1304112-10
1304112-11
1304112-12
1304112-13
1304112-14
1304112-15
1304112-16
1304112-17
1304112-18
Matrix
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
Date
Time
Collected Collected
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
LIMS Version: 6.640
E-58
3 of 22
E-59
4 of 22
E-60
5 of 22
E-61
6 of 22
E-62
7 of 22
E-63
8 of 22
Gamma Spectroscopy Results
PAI 713 Rev 12
Method
PAI 713
Blank
RevResults
12
Lab ID: GS130409-4MB
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Prep Batch: GS130409-4
QCBatchID: GS130409-4-1
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
-0.01 +/- 0.26
Final Aliquot: 100 g
Result Units: pCi/g
File Name: 130549d06
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.50
1
U
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
U - Result is less than the sample specific MDC or less than the associated TPU.
SQ - Spectral quality prevents accurate quantitation.
SI - Nuclide identification and/or quantitation is tentative.
TI - Nuclide identification is tentative.
R - Nuclide has exceeded 8 halflives.
Data Package ID: GSS1304112-1
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.640
E-64
9 of 22
PAI 713 Rev 12
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: GS130409-4LCS
Library: ANALYTICAL
CASNO
Target
Nuclide
Run ID: GS130409-4A
MDC
Spike Added
Final Aliquot: 100 g
Result Units: pCi/g
% Rec Control
Limits
Results +/- 2 s TPU
Lab
Qualifier
14596-10-2
Am-241
1040 +/- 120
10
1026
101
85 - 115
P
10198-40-0
Co-60
495 +/- 58
2
502.3
98.5
85 - 115
P
10045-97-3
Cs-137
409 +/- 48
2
384.8
106
85 - 115
P
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.640
10 of 22
E-65
PAI 713 Rev 12
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Analyte
15262-20-1
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Sample
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Ra-228
0.62 +/- 0.63
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
Duplicate
MDC
Flags
0.98
U,G
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.56 +/- 0.57
MDC
Flags
0.90
U,G
DER
DER
Lim
0.0705
2.13
Comments:
Abbreviations:
NR - Not Reported
G - Sample density differs by more than 15% of LCS density.
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.640
11 of 22
E-66
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-1
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.72 +/- 0.51
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.70
1
LT,G,TI
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
12 of 22
E-67
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-2
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.43 +/- 0.59
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.98
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 2 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
13 of 22
E-68
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-3
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.61 +/- 0.57
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.87
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 3 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
14 of 22
E-69
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-4
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
1.06 +/- 0.70
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.90
1
G,NQ
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 4 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
15 of 22
E-70
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-5
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.51 +/- 0.50
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.80
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 5 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
16 of 22
E-71
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-6
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.62 +/- 0.63
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.98
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 6 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
17 of 22
E-72
PAI 713 Rev 12
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.56 +/- 0.57
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.90
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.640
18 of 22
E-73
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-7
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.28 +/- 0.56
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.96
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 7 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
19 of 22
E-74
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-8
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.60 +/- 0.51
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.74
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 8 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
20 of 22
E-75
PAI 713 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-9
Library: RA228.LIB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
15262-20-1
Ra-228
Run ID: GS130409-4A
Result +/- 2 s TPU
0.42 +/- 0.38
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.58
1
U,G
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 9 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.640
21 of 22
E-76
TECHNICAL BULLETIN ADDENDUM
The library used for analysis defines the gamma emission(s) to be used for
analysis of each nuclide. If multiple gamma emissions are used for quantification, then a
‘NET’ quantification emission (or peak) must be defined in the library. This designation
provides for the calculation of nuclide activity concentrations and detection limits in the
case of non-presence of the nuclide. When the nuclide is not present, or the software is
unable to resolve a peak at the library defined ‘NET’ energy, the software evaluates the
‘NET’ region of interest (‘NET’ peak energy +/- 2 keV) by performing a summation of
the net counts above the background level. This ‘NET’ quantification can result in net
negative, zero, or positive activity results, and is highly dependent on the spectral
distribution in the region of interest of the ‘NET’ peak. In cases where only the ‘NET’
peak is found, and the software performs a net quantification, the nuclide result will be
flagged with an ‘NQ’ qualifier on the final reports. This indicates that the nuclide is not
detected or supported at any level above the reported MDC. Results are submitted
without further qualification.
All nuclides specified in the library of analysis for gamma spectroscopy are
evaluated for positive OR tentative identification on the following criteria:
- The individual abundances for the gamma emissions specified for each
nuclide are summed to obtain a total nuclide abundance.
- From the total nuclide abundance, a positive identification criterion is set as
75% of this total nuclide abundance.
- For all nuclide peaks that are not net quantified, those peak abundances are
summed. The total non-net quantified peak sum is compared to the calculated
75% abundance criterion. If this sum is greater than the 75% criterion, the
nuclide is considered to be positively identified at the reported concentration.
If the sum is less than the 75% criterion, the nuclide is tentatively identified at
the reported concentration. These results will be flagged with a ‘TI’ qualifier
on the final reports to indicate that the 75% abundance criterion was not met.
22 of 22
E-77
Isotopic Thorium
Case Narrative
Israel – 2560
1. This report consists of the analytical results for nine sediment samples received by ALS on
04/08/2013.
2. These samples were prepared according to the current revisions of SOP 773, SOP 777, and
SOP 736.
3. The samples were analyzed for the presence of isotopic thorium according to the current revision
of SOP 714. The analyses were completed on 04/13/2013.
4. The isotopic analysis results for these samples are reported on a ‘Dry Weight’ basis in units of
pCi/gram.
5. The requested MDC for Th-228 and/or Th-230 was not met for several samples. The
reported activity for these samples is greater than the achieved MDC. These samples are
identified with an “M3” flag on the final reports.
6. No further anomalous situations were encountered during the preparation or analysis of these
samples. All remaining quality control criteria were met.
1 of 21
E-78
_______________________________
Jean Anderson
__4/17/13___
Date
_______________________________
04/25/13
___________
Date
2 of 21
E-79
OrderNum:
Client Name:
Client PO Number:
1304112
Israel
2560
Client Sample
Number
P-S3/13-TF1-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF2-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF3-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF4-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF5-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF6-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13TF7-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF8-Ra226/228, Th228
P-S3/13-TF9-Ra226/228, Th228
Page 1 of 1
Lab Sample
Number
COC Number
1304112-1
1304112-2
1304112-3
1304112-4
1304112-5
1304112-6
1304112-7
1304112-8
1304112-9
1304112-10
1304112-11
1304112-12
1304112-13
1304112-14
1304112-15
1304112-16
1304112-17
1304112-18
Matrix
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
SEDIMEN
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
WATER
Date
Time
Collected Collected
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
25-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
26-Mar-13
Date Printed: Wednesday, April 17, 2013
LIMS Version: 6.639
3 of 21
E-80
4 of 21
E-81
5 of 21
E-82
6 of 21
E-83
7 of 21
E-84
8 of 21
E-85
Isotopic Thorium By Alpha Spectroscopy
PAI 714 Rev 12
Method
PAI 714
Blank
RevResults
12
Lab ID: AS130410-2MB
CASNO
Target Nuclide
14274-82-9
Th-228
14269-63-7
7440-29-1
Prep Batch: AS130410-2
QCBatchID: AS130410-2-1
Run ID: AS130410-2TH
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Result Units: pCi/g
File Name: Spectrum #1
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
-0.004 +/- 0.021
0.038
0.1
U
Th-230
0.004 +/- 0.022
0.038
0.1
U
Th-232
0.0038 +/- 0.0084
0.0149
0.1
U
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
2.312
1.88
pCi/g
81.1
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Data Package ID: TH1304112-1
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.639
9 of 21
E-86
PAI 714 Rev 12
Lab ID: AS130410-2LCS
CASNO
14269-63-7
Target
Nuclide
MDC
Spike Added
Result Units: pCi/g
% Rec Control
Limits
Results +/- 2 s TPU
Th-230
2.26 +/- 0.37
0.04
2.283
99.2
Lab
Qualifier
85 - 121
P
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
2.312
1.47
pCi/g
63.7
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.639
10 of 21
E-87
PAI 714 Rev 12
CASNO
Analyte
Sample
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
Duplicate
MDC
Flags
M3
Result +/- 2 s TPU
DER
DER
Lim
M3
0.378
2.13
M3
0.0206
2.13
0.185
2.13
MDC
Flags
0.64 +/- 0.16
0.13
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.56 +/- 0.14
0.13
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.27 +/- 0.25
0.10
1.28 +/- 0.26
0.11
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.68 +/- 0.14
0.03
0.64 +/- 0.15
0.04
Comments:
Abbreviations:
NR - Not Reported
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.639
11 of 21
E-88
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-1
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.64 +/- 0.14
0.09
0.1
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.08 +/- 0.21
0.09
0.1
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.70 +/- 0.14
0.04
0.1
Lab Qualifier
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.524
2.62
pCi/g
58.0
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
12 of 21
E-89
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-2
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.60 +/- 0.16
0.16
0.1
M3
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.21 +/- 0.24
0.12
0.1
M3
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.78 +/- 0.17
0.06
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.343
1.62
pCi/g
37.3
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 2 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
13 of 21
E-90
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-3
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
M3
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.56 +/- 0.14
0.13
0.1
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.27 +/- 0.25
0.10
0.1
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.68 +/- 0.14
0.03
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.307
1.95
pCi/g
45.3
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 3 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
14 of 21
E-91
PAI 714 Rev 12
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
CASNO
Target Nuclide
14274-82-9
Th-228
14269-63-7
7440-29-1
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
0.64 +/- 0.16
0.13
0.1
M3
Th-230
1.28 +/- 0.26
0.11
0.1
M3
Th-232
0.64 +/- 0.15
0.04
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.356
1.65
pCi/g
37.9
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 1 of 1
LIMS Version: 6.639
15 of 21
E-92
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-4
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
M3
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.66 +/- 0.15
0.12
0.1
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.24 +/- 0.24
0.10
0.1
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.64 +/- 0.13
0.02
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.381
2.22
pCi/g
50.6
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 4 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
16 of 21
E-93
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-5
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.68 +/- 0.17
0.16
0.1
M3
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.29 +/- 0.25
0.10
0.1
M3
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.74 +/- 0.16
0.01
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.221
1.66
pCi/g
39.4
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 5 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
17 of 21
E-94
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-6
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.73 +/- 0.15
0.08
0.1
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.24 +/- 0.23
0.10
0.1
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.70 +/- 0.14
0.01
0.1
Lab Qualifier
M3
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.316
2.34
pCi/g
54.2
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 6 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
18 of 21
E-95
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-7
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
M3
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.67 +/- 0.16
0.12
0.1
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.22 +/- 0.23
0.10
0.1
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.64 +/- 0.14
0.03
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.472
2.03
pCi/g
45.5
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 7 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
19 of 21
E-96
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-8
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.63 +/- 0.13
0.09
0.1
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.19 +/- 0.22
0.08
0.1
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.68 +/- 0.13
0.03
0.1
Lab Qualifier
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.315
2.44
pCi/g
56.6
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 8 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
20 of 21
E-97
PAI 714 Rev 12
Sample Results
Lab Name:
Work Order Number:
Client Name:
ClientProject ID:
1304112
Israel 2560
Lab ID: 1304112-9
CASNO
Target Nuclide
Result +/- 2 s TPU
Moisture(%): NA
Result Units: pCi/g
MDC
Requested
MDC
Lab Qualifier
14274-82-9
Th-228
0.72 +/- 0.18
0.16
0.1
M3
14269-63-7
Th-230
1.27 +/- 0.25
0.11
0.1
M3
7440-29-1
Th-232
0.70 +/- 0.15
0.04
0.1
Carrier/Tracer
Amount Added
Result
Units
Yield
Control
Limits
Th-229
4.352
1.51
pCi/g
34.8
30 - 110 %
Flag
Comments:
Qualifiers/Flags:
Abbreviations:
Page 9 of 9
LIMS Version: 6.639
21 of 21
E-98
APPENDIX F
Sediment Grain Size Analytical Data Sheets
F-1
LASER GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
Sediment
P-S3/13-A1-GS/TOC
3402945873.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
1.0
1.6
2.3
2.9
3.4
3.8
4.0
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.3
4.4
4.6
4.8
4.9
4.9
4.6
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
10.2
15.9
17.5
19.3
35.2
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.9
1.9
3.5
5.8
8.7
12.1
15.9
19.9
23.9
28.0
32.2
36.4
40.9
45.5
50.3
55.3
60.1
64.8
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
Incremental Volume, percent
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.2
3.8
3.3
2.8
2.5
2.3
2.3
2.4
2.6
2.6
2.4
2.0
1.3
0.7
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
69.0
72.8
76.1
78.9
81.4
83.6
85.9
88.4
90.9
93.5
95.9
97.9
99.2
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Cumulative Volume Percent greater than
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0466
4.4231
0.0018
4.8504
0.0014
0.0347
5.2561
0.0010
0.0262
5.8147
0.0007
0.0178
7.2335
0.0003
0.0066
8.6642
0.0001
0.0025
9.5393
0.0001
0.0013
10.1601
0.0000
0.0009
10.6485
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0066
0.0101
2.6846
0.9918
0.2264
Folk, phi
7.2335
7.3430
2.0140
0.0869
0.8954
Cumulative Volume, percent
Job #2560
Marine Samples Israel
Inches
0.0003
0.0004
F-2
Sediment
P-S3/13-A2-GS/TOC
3402945875.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.6
1.0
1.4
1.9
2.4
2.8
3.1
3.4
3.6
3.8
4.0
4.2
4.5
4.7
4.9
5.0
4.9
4.7
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
8.5
14.0
17.4
19.6
38.4
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.5
1.1
2.0
3.5
5.4
7.7
10.5
13.7
17.1
20.7
24.6
28.6
32.8
37.3
42.0
46.9
51.9
56.8
61.6
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.4
3.9
3.5
3.1
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.6
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.2
1.6
0.9
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
65.9
69.8
73.3
76.4
79.1
81.6
84.2
86.8
89.6
92.4
95.1
97.3
98.9
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0455
4.4577
0.0018
4.9553
0.0013
0.0322
5.4217
0.0009
0.0233
6.0274
0.0006
0.0153
7.4053
0.0002
0.0059
8.8844
0.0001
0.0021
9.7331
0.0000
0.0012
10.2823
0.0000
0.0008
10.7417
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0059
0.0087
2.6917
0.9322
0.2102
Folk, phi
7.4053
7.5201
2.0300
0.0709
0.9014
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0003
F-3
Sediment
P-S3/13-A3-GS/TOC
3402945877.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.7
1.5
2.5
3.7
4.7
5.4
5.7
5.4
4.9
4.2
3.6
3.2
3.0
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.4
3.5
3.4
3.3
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
8.3
21.2
15.9
12.3
13.6
28.5
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.9
2.4
4.9
8.5
13.3
18.7
24.3
29.8
34.6
38.8
42.5
45.7
48.7
51.6
54.7
57.9
61.3
64.8
68.2
71.5
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
3.1
2.8
2.5
2.2
2.0
1.9
1.9
2.0
2.2
2.2
2.1
1.8
1.3
0.7
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
74.6
77.3
79.8
82.0
84.0
85.8
87.8
89.8
91.9
94.1
96.2
97.9
99.2
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0738
3.7604
0.0029
4.0827
0.0023
0.0590
4.3788
0.0019
0.0481
4.7792
0.0014
0.0364
6.3636
0.0005
0.0121
8.2877
0.0001
0.0032
9.2530
0.0001
0.0016
10.0277
0.0000
0.0010
10.6051
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0121
0.0198
3.3735
0.7902
0.2861
Folk, phi
6.3636
6.6651
2.2556
0.2125
0.7996
Job #2560
Inches
0.0005
0.0008
F-4
Sediment
P-S3/13-A4-GS/TOC
3402945879.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.7
1.5
2.6
3.9
5.1
6.0
6.4
6.1
5.5
4.6
3.8
3.2
2.8
2.6
2.6
2.7
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.9
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
13.1
24.0
14.4
10.8
11.8
24.9
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
1.0
2.4
5.1
9.0
14.1
20.1
26.4
32.6
38.1
42.7
46.5
49.7
52.5
55.1
57.7
60.4
63.3
66.2
69.2
72.2
75.1
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
2.7
2.4
2.2
1.9
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.5
1.1
0.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
77.7
80.2
82.3
84.2
86.0
87.6
89.3
91.0
92.9
94.8
96.6
98.2
99.3
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0886
3.4961
0.0035
3.8059
0.0028
0.0715
4.0827
0.0023
0.0590
4.4431
0.0018
0.0460
5.7745
0.0007
0.0183
7.9920
0.0002
0.0039
8.9694
0.0001
0.0020
9.8561
0.0000
0.0011
10.5222
0.0000
0.0007
Trask, mm
0.0183
0.0250
3.4211
0.5410
0.2985
Folk, phi
5.7745
6.2755
2.2862
0.3295
0.8114
Job #2560
Inches
0.0007
0.0010
F-5
Sediment
P-S3/13-A5-GS/TOC
3402945881.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.6
1.6
3.0
4.7
6.3
7.2
7.4
6.9
5.8
4.6
3.5
2.7
2.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.2
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.2
25.6
20.7
8.9
8.5
9.2
21.9
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.7
2.2
5.2
10.0
16.2
23.4
30.8
37.7
43.5
48.1
51.6
54.3
56.5
58.5
60.4
62.4
64.5
66.7
68.9
71.2
73.6
75.9
78.1
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.0
0.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
80.2
82.2
84.0
85.7
87.2
88.7
90.2
91.8
93.5
95.2
96.8
98.3
99.3
99.9
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.1264
2.9843
0.0050
3.2519
0.0041
0.1050
3.4924
0.0035
0.0889
3.8027
0.0028
0.0717
4.8794
0.0013
0.0340
7.6540
0.0002
0.0050
8.7442
0.0001
0.0023
9.7221
0.0000
0.0012
10.4701
0.0000
0.0007
Trask, mm
0.0340
0.0383
3.7991
0.3082
0.3213
Folk, phi
4.8794
5.7053
2.4472
0.4827
0.7966
Job #2560
Inches
0.0013
0.0015
F-6
Sediment
P-S3/13-A6-GS/TOC
3402945883.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.7
1.1
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.7
3.0
3.3
3.6
3.8
3.9
3.9
3.7
3.4
3.1
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
1.9
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.1
3.7
10.0
14.6
14.2
10.1
8.9
7.9
7.5
22.9
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
1.1
2.2
3.8
5.9
8.2
10.9
13.8
17.1
20.7
24.5
28.4
32.3
36.1
39.5
42.6
45.4
47.9
50.4
52.7
55.0
57.3
59.5
61.6
63.7
65.7
67.6
69.6
71.5
73.4
75.2
77.1
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.6
1.2
0.7
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
78.9
80.6
82.3
83.9
85.4
87.0
88.6
90.5
92.4
94.4
96.3
97.9
99.1
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.4504
1.1508
0.0177
1.6692
0.0124
0.3144
2.1678
0.0088
0.2225
2.7835
0.0057
0.1452
4.7112
0.0015
0.0382
7.7179
0.0002
0.0048
9.0224
0.0001
0.0019
9.9386
0.0000
0.0010
10.5740
0.0000
0.0007
Trask, mm
0.0382
0.0750
5.5296
0.4734
0.2241
Folk, phi
4.7112
5.3005
3.1414
0.2511
0.7827
Job #2560
Inches
0.0015
0.0030
F-7
Sediment
P-S3/13-A7-GS/TOC
3402945885.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
Wentworth
Size
Class
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
3.1
10.2
23.0
40.5
59.9
77.3
89.9
96.9
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Clay
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.4
2.7
7.1
12.8
17.6
19.4
17.4
12.5
7.0
2.7
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.2
67.1
22.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.2797
1.8379
0.0110
1.9941
0.0099
0.2510
2.1270
0.0090
0.2289
2.2819
0.0081
0.2056
2.6217
0.0064
0.1625
2.9626
0.0051
0.1283
3.1187
0.0045
0.1151
3.2530
0.0041
0.1049
3.4120
0.0037
0.0939
Trask, mm
0.1625
0.1670
1.2661
0.9993
0.2646
Folk, phi
2.6217
2.6225
0.4864
0.0032
0.9477
Job #2560
Inches
0.0064
0.0066
F-8
Sediment
P-S3/13-B1-GS/TOC
3402945887.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.5
1.9
2.3
2.8
3.3
3.7
4.1
4.3
4.5
4.7
4.7
4.7
4.6
4.4
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.1
2.5
5.5
12.1
17.6
18.4
42.6
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.9
1.3
1.8
2.3
3.0
3.8
4.7
5.9
7.4
9.3
11.6
14.4
17.7
21.4
25.4
29.8
34.3
39.0
43.7
48.4
53.0
57.4
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.1
3.9
3.5
3.3
3.0
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.0
2.7
2.0
1.3
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
61.5
65.4
68.9
72.2
75.2
78.2
81.1
84.2
87.5
90.7
93.7
96.4
98.4
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0501
4.3189
0.0020
5.0813
0.0012
0.0295
5.6259
0.0008
0.0203
6.2253
0.0005
0.0134
7.5873
0.0002
0.0052
9.2311
0.0001
0.0017
9.9832
0.0000
0.0010
10.4457
0.0000
0.0007
10.8655
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0052
0.0075
2.8342
0.8225
0.2030
Folk, phi
7.5873
7.7321
2.0812
0.0506
0.8926
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0003
F-9
Sediment
P-S3/13-B2-GS/TOC
3402945889.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.7
0.9
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.1
4.5
4.9
5.2
5.4
5.5
5.4
5.2
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
4.4
11.0
18.7
21.6
43.7
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.6
1.3
2.2
3.4
5.0
7.0
9.5
12.5
16.1
20.1
24.6
29.6
34.8
40.2
45.7
51.2
56.3
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.8
4.4
3.9
3.5
3.1
2.9
2.9
3.1
3.2
3.2
3.0
2.5
1.8
1.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
61.1
65.5
69.4
72.8
76.0
78.9
81.9
84.9
88.2
91.4
94.4
96.9
98.7
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0313
4.9982
0.0012
5.5447
0.0008
0.0214
5.9963
0.0006
0.0157
6.5186
0.0004
0.0109
7.6956
0.0002
0.0048
9.1700
0.0001
0.0017
9.9259
0.0000
0.0010
10.3924
0.0000
0.0007
10.8074
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0048
0.0063
2.5066
0.8137
0.2217
Folk, phi
7.6956
7.8726
1.8626
0.1033
0.8979
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0002
F-10
Sediment
P-S3/13-B3-GS/TOC
3402945891.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.7
2.2
2.8
3.3
3.8
4.3
4.7
5.1
5.4
5.6
5.6
5.5
5.2
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
4.5
12.1
19.5
21.9
41.6
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.9
1.8
3.1
4.8
7.0
9.8
13.1
16.9
21.3
26.0
31.1
36.5
42.0
47.7
53.2
58.4
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.8
4.3
3.8
3.3
2.9
2.7
2.8
2.9
3.1
3.1
2.9
2.4
1.6
0.8
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
63.2
67.5
71.3
74.6
77.5
80.3
83.0
86.0
89.1
92.2
95.1
97.4
99.0
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0308
5.0232
0.0012
5.5178
0.0009
0.0218
5.9423
0.0006
0.0163
6.4486
0.0005
0.0114
7.6054
0.0002
0.0051
9.0337
0.0001
0.0019
9.8335
0.0000
0.0011
10.3224
0.0000
0.0008
10.7417
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0051
0.0067
2.4496
0.8284
0.2267
Folk, phi
7.6054
7.7937
1.8393
0.1210
0.9066
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0003
F-11
Sediment
P-S3/13-B4-GS/TOC
3402945893.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.7
2.1
2.7
3.3
4.0
4.6
5.2
5.6
5.8
5.8
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
2.8
6.3
14.6
22.4
53.6
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.8
1.4
2.2
3.1
4.2
5.5
7.2
9.4
12.1
15.4
19.4
24.0
29.2
34.8
40.6
46.4
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.6
5.3
4.9
4.4
4.1
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.0
2.2
1.5
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
52.0
57.2
62.1
66.6
70.6
74.4
78.1
81.8
85.7
89.4
92.9
95.8
98.1
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0236
5.4064
0.0009
6.0642
0.0006
0.0149
6.5423
0.0004
0.0107
7.0506
0.0003
0.0075
8.1601
0.0001
0.0035
9.5414
0.0001
0.0013
10.1420
0.0000
0.0009
10.5414
0.0000
0.0007
10.9231
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0035
0.0044
2.3708
0.8282
0.2172
Folk, phi
8.1601
8.2815
1.7358
0.0514
0.9077
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-12
Sediment
P-S3/13-C1-GS/TOC
3402945895.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.8
2.3
2.8
3.3
3.8
4.2
4.5
4.8
5.1
5.3
5.4
5.3
5.1
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
4.5
12.3
18.6
21.1
42.8
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.7
1.3
2.2
3.5
5.3
7.6
10.4
13.8
17.5
21.7
26.2
31.1
36.2
41.5
46.8
52.2
57.2
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.7
4.3
3.8
3.4
3.1
2.9
2.9
3.0
3.1
3.1
2.9
2.5
1.8
1.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
62.0
66.3
70.1
73.5
76.6
79.4
82.3
85.3
88.4
91.5
94.5
96.9
98.7
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0319
4.9685
0.0013
5.4661
0.0009
0.0226
5.9017
0.0007
0.0167
6.4338
0.0005
0.0116
7.6479
0.0002
0.0050
9.1178
0.0001
0.0018
9.8954
0.0000
0.0011
10.3770
0.0000
0.0008
10.7997
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0050
0.0067
2.5350
0.8375
0.2233
Folk, phi
7.6479
7.8150
1.8819
0.1033
0.8904
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0003
F-13
Sediment
P-S3/13-C2-GS/TOC
3402945897.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.8
2.2
2.7
3.3
4.0
4.6
5.2
5.6
5.8
5.7
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.7
1.4
3.6
6.9
14.7
22.2
50.4
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.2
1.4
1.8
2.3
3.0
3.8
4.8
5.9
7.2
8.7
10.5
12.8
15.5
18.8
22.8
27.4
32.6
38.2
43.9
49.6
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.4
5.1
4.6
4.2
3.8
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.5
3.2
2.8
2.0
1.3
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
55.1
60.1
64.8
68.9
72.7
76.3
79.7
83.2
86.8
90.3
93.6
96.3
98.4
99.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0359
4.8005
0.0014
5.6817
0.0008
0.0195
6.2927
0.0005
0.0128
6.8741
0.0003
0.0085
8.0164
0.0002
0.0039
9.4090
0.0001
0.0015
10.0520
0.0000
0.0009
10.4762
0.0000
0.0007
10.8736
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0039
0.0050
2.4074
0.8408
0.1878
Folk, phi
8.0164
8.1204
1.8600
0.0119
0.9819
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0002
F-14
Sediment
P-S3/13-C3-GS/TOC
3402945899.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.4
2.0
2.7
3.6
4.5
5.4
6.1
6.7
6.8
6.7
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.3
4.9
16.1
26.3
50.8
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.7
1.0
1.3
1.8
2.5
3.4
4.8
6.7
9.4
13.0
17.5
22.8
29.0
35.6
42.5
49.2
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client IDL
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
6.3
5.7
5.0
4.4
3.8
3.4
3.3
3.3
3.4
3.3
3.1
2.6
1.9
1.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
55.4
61.1
66.1
70.5
74.3
77.7
81.0
84.3
87.8
91.1
94.2
96.8
98.6
99.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0182
5.7834
0.0007
6.2947
0.0005
0.0127
6.6737
0.0004
0.0098
7.0912
0.0003
0.0073
8.0322
0.0002
0.0038
9.2995
0.0001
0.0016
9.9730
0.0000
0.0010
10.4159
0.0000
0.0007
10.8230
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0038
0.0045
2.1497
0.7976
0.2393
Folk, phi
8.0322
8.2263
1.5884
0.1420
0.9353
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0002
F-15
Sediment
P-S3/13-C4-GS/TOC
3402945901.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.8
2.4
3.1
3.8
4.5
5.2
5.7
6.1
6.3
6.2
5.9
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
2.1
8.7
19.2
24.4
45.4
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.8
1.4
2.3
3.6
5.5
7.9
11.0
14.8
19.3
24.5
30.2
36.3
42.6
48.7
54.6
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.4
4.9
4.3
3.8
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.1
2.9
2.4
1.7
1.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
60.0
64.9
69.2
72.9
76.3
79.3
82.4
85.4
88.6
91.7
94.6
97.0
98.8
99.8
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0230
5.4435
0.0009
5.9238
0.0006
0.0165
6.3189
0.0005
0.0125
6.7731
0.0004
0.0091
7.8020
0.0002
0.0045
9.1518
0.0001
0.0018
9.8844
0.0000
0.0011
10.3579
0.0000
0.0008
10.7844
0.0000
0.0006
Trask, mm
0.0045
0.0055
2.2805
0.8005
0.2350
Folk, phi
7.8020
8.0018
1.7006
0.1425
0.9202
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0002
F-16
Sediment
P-S3/13-D1-GS/TOC
3402945903.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.9
2.3
2.7
3.3
3.8
4.4
4.9
5.1
5.2
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
1.9
3.4
4.5
6.3
12.1
19.6
51.8
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.6
1.0
1.6
2.2
2.9
3.7
4.6
5.6
6.6
7.7
8.9
10.1
11.5
12.9
14.6
16.5
18.8
21.5
24.8
28.6
33.0
37.9
43.0
48.2
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.2
5.0
4.7
4.3
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.4
2.9
2.2
1.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
53.4
58.4
63.0
67.4
71.3
75.1
78.7
82.4
86.1
89.8
93.2
96.1
98.2
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0693
3.8513
0.0027
4.9746
0.0013
0.0318
5.9411
0.0006
0.0163
6.7668
0.0004
0.0092
8.0845
0.0001
0.0037
9.4949
0.0001
0.0014
10.1066
0.0000
0.0009
10.5137
0.0000
0.0007
10.9009
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0037
0.0053
2.5740
0.9378
0.1253
Folk, phi
8.0845
8.0441
2.1095
-0.1150
1.0591
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-17
Sediment
P-S3/13-D2-GS/TOC
3402945905.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.4
3.0
3.7
4.3
4.9
5.4
5.7
5.7
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
1.5
3.2
5.9
13.4
21.7
53.8
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.6
3.4
4.2
5.2
6.3
7.6
9.1
11.1
13.5
16.5
20.1
24.5
29.4
34.8
40.4
46.2
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.6
5.3
4.9
4.5
4.0
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.1
2.3
1.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
51.7
57.0
61.9
66.4
70.4
74.1
77.8
81.5
85.3
89.0
92.5
95.6
97.9
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0322
4.9548
0.0013
5.8700
0.0007
0.0171
6.4624
0.0004
0.0113
7.0286
0.0003
0.0077
8.1713
0.0001
0.0035
9.5587
0.0001
0.0013
10.1650
0.0000
0.0009
10.5652
0.0000
0.0007
10.9457
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0035
0.0045
2.4033
0.8439
0.1926
Folk, phi
8.1713
8.2662
1.8334
0.0016
0.9704
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-18
Sediment
P-S3/13-D3-GS/TOC
3402945907.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.8
2.1
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.1
4.7
5.1
5.4
5.5
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.9
4.3
6.7
13.1
20.6
53.2
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.8
1.3
2.0
2.9
4.0
5.1
6.4
7.8
9.3
11.1
13.1
15.6
18.5
22.1
26.2
30.8
36.0
41.3
46.8
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.4
5.1
4.8
4.4
4.1
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.0
2.2
1.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
52.2
57.3
62.1
66.5
70.6
74.4
78.1
81.9
85.7
89.5
92.9
95.9
98.2
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0378
4.7249
0.0015
5.6044
0.0008
0.0206
6.2878
0.0005
0.0128
6.9319
0.0003
0.0082
8.1469
0.0001
0.0035
9.5414
0.0001
0.0013
10.1388
0.0000
0.0009
10.5371
0.0000
0.0007
10.9175
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0035
0.0048
2.4704
0.8830
0.1722
Folk, phi
8.1469
8.1912
1.9010
-0.0354
0.9726
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-19
Sediment
P-S3/13-E1-GS/TOC
3402945909.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.8
2.2
2.6
3.2
3.8
4.4
5.0
5.3
5.5
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.9
2.5
4.1
5.9
11.8
20.2
54.5
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.9
2.6
3.4
4.3
5.4
6.4
7.6
8.8
10.1
11.6
13.4
15.6
18.2
21.4
25.3
29.7
34.6
40.0
45.5
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.5
5.3
5.0
4.6
4.2
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.8
3.5
3.0
2.3
1.5
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
51.0
56.3
61.3
65.9
70.2
74.1
77.8
81.6
85.5
89.2
92.8
95.8
98.1
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0469
4.4148
0.0018
5.4794
0.0009
0.0224
6.2909
0.0005
0.0128
6.9841
0.0003
0.0079
8.2054
0.0001
0.0034
9.5620
0.0001
0.0013
10.1535
0.0000
0.0009
10.5500
0.0000
0.0007
10.9288
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0034
0.0046
2.4435
0.9104
0.1512
Folk, phi
8.2054
8.2166
1.9526
-0.0776
1.0356
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-20
Sediment
P-S3/13-E2-GS/TOC
3402945911.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.7
3.2
3.8
4.4
4.9
5.2
5.4
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.1
2.4
4.7
6.6
11.9
19.8
53.3
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.7
2.2
2.9
3.7
4.6
5.8
7.0
8.4
9.9
11.4
13.1
15.0
17.3
20.0
23.2
27.0
31.3
36.2
41.4
46.7
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.3
5.1
4.8
4.5
4.1
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.0
2.2
1.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
52.1
57.2
62.1
66.6
70.7
74.5
78.3
82.0
85.9
89.6
93.0
96.0
98.2
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0496
4.3322
0.0020
5.2739
0.0010
0.0258
6.1118
0.0006
0.0145
6.8753
0.0003
0.0085
8.1518
0.0001
0.0035
9.5318
0.0001
0.0014
10.1291
0.0000
0.0009
10.5286
0.0000
0.0007
10.9092
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0035
0.0049
2.5110
0.9309
0.1424
Folk, phi
8.1518
8.1309
2.0008
-0.0886
1.0147
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-21
Sediment
P-S3/13-E3-GS/TOC
3402945913.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.8
2.2
2.6
3.1
3.7
4.2
4.7
5.1
5.3
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
1.1
2.5
4.6
6.3
11.5
19.4
54.5
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.7
1.0
1.3
1.7
2.3
3.0
3.8
4.8
5.9
7.1
8.4
9.7
11.2
12.8
14.6
16.8
19.4
22.4
26.1
30.3
35.1
40.2
45.5
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.3
5.1
4.9
4.5
4.2
3.9
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
3.6
3.1
2.3
1.5
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
50.8
55.9
60.8
65.3
69.5
73.5
77.3
81.2
85.2
89.1
92.7
95.8
98.1
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0507
4.3025
0.0020
5.2962
0.0010
0.0255
6.1630
0.0005
0.0140
6.9284
0.0003
0.0082
8.2130
0.0001
0.0034
9.5995
0.0001
0.0013
10.1733
0.0000
0.0009
10.5609
0.0000
0.0007
10.9316
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0034
0.0047
2.5237
0.9318
0.1396
Folk, phi
8.2130
8.1831
2.0070
-0.1011
1.0171
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-22
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF1-GS/TOC
3402945855.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.7
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.7
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.6
3.1
3.6
4.1
4.5
4.8
4.9
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
2.6
2.1
4.9
7.0
11.5
18.3
52.7
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.8
1.6
2.4
3.0
3.5
3.8
4.3
4.8
5.6
6.5
7.7
9.0
10.5
12.0
13.7
15.5
17.5
19.7
22.3
25.4
28.9
33.0
37.5
42.3
47.3
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.50000
30
0.70711
6
1.00000
40
1.41421
8
2.00000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.9
4.8
4.6
4.3
4.0
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.9
3.6
3.1
2.4
1.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
52.2
57.0
61.6
65.8
69.8
73.6
77.3
81.1
85.1
88.9
92.5
95.6
98.0
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0709
3.8182
0.0028
4.9238
0.0013
0.0329
5.8186
0.0007
0.0177
6.7218
0.0004
0.0095
8.1380
0.0001
0.0036
9.5939
0.0001
0.0013
10.1834
0.0000
0.0009
10.5718
0.0000
0.0007
10.9429
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0036
0.0054
2.7058
0.9728
0.1267
Folk, phi
8.1380
8.0467
2.1707
-0.1377
1.0166
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-23
Job #2560
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF2-GS/TOC
3402945857.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.8
2.1
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.7
4.2
4.6
4.9
5.0
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
2.8
5.1
7.1
12.1
18.8
53.6
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.5
0.9
1.5
2.3
3.3
4.4
5.7
7.0
8.4
10.0
11.6
13.5
15.5
17.9
20.7
23.9
27.6
31.8
36.4
41.3
46.4
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.50000
30
0.70711
6
1.00000
40
1.41421
8
2.00000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.0
4.9
4.7
4.4
4.1
3.9
3.8
3.9
4.0
3.9
3.6
3.1
2.4
1.6
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
51.4
56.3
61.0
65.4
69.4
73.3
77.1
81.0
84.9
88.8
92.5
95.6
98.0
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0484
4.3690
0.0019
5.2535
0.0010
0.0262
6.0531
0.0006
0.0151
6.8293
0.0003
0.0088
8.1800
0.0001
0.0034
9.6130
0.0001
0.0013
10.1918
0.0000
0.0009
10.5762
0.0000
0.0007
10.9486
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0034
0.0050
2.6242
0.9446
0.1471
Folk, phi
8.1800
8.1416
2.0316
-0.0931
0.9687
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-24
Job #2560
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF3-GS/TOC
3402945859.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.9
1.0
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.9
2.1
2.5
2.9
3.3
3.8
4.3
4.6
4.8
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
2.2
2.7
4.9
6.7
10.8
17.6
54.7
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.5
1.1
1.7
2.2
2.8
3.3
3.9
4.6
5.5
6.5
7.6
8.9
10.3
11.8
13.4
15.1
17.0
19.1
21.5
24.4
27.7
31.6
35.8
40.5
45.3
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.9
4.9
4.7
4.4
4.2
3.9
3.9
4.0
4.1
4.0
3.8
3.3
2.5
1.7
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
50.2
55.1
59.8
64.2
68.4
72.3
76.2
80.2
84.3
88.3
92.1
95.4
97.9
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0683
3.8730
0.0027
4.9463
0.0013
0.0324
5.8752
0.0007
0.0170
6.7971
0.0004
0.0090
8.2390
0.0001
0.0033
9.6718
0.0000
0.0012
10.2329
0.0000
0.0008
10.6074
0.0000
0.0006
10.9687
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0033
0.0051
2.7082
1.0062
0.1221
Folk, phi
8.2390
8.1157
2.1645
-0.1577
1.0116
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-25
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF4-GS/TOC
3402945861.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.3
2.7
3.1
3.7
4.2
4.7
5.1
5.3
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
2.7
5.3
7.1
11.7
19.2
53.9
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.6
1.2
1.9
2.9
4.0
5.3
6.7
8.2
9.8
11.4
13.2
15.2
17.5
20.2
23.3
27.0
31.2
35.8
40.9
46.1
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.3
5.1
4.9
4.6
4.2
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.8
3.5
3.0
2.2
1.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
51.4
56.6
61.4
66.0
70.2
74.1
78.0
81.8
85.7
89.5
93.0
96.0
98.2
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0459
4.4458
0.0018
5.2874
0.0010
0.0256
6.0868
0.0006
0.0147
6.8709
0.0003
0.0085
8.1825
0.0001
0.0034
9.5554
0.0001
0.0013
10.1388
0.0000
0.0009
10.5328
0.0000
0.0007
10.9120
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0034
0.0049
2.5355
0.9584
0.1447
Folk, phi
8.1825
8.1360
1.9927
-0.0951
0.9872
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-26
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF5-GS/TOC
3402945863.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.3
2.7
3.3
3.9
4.5
5.0
5.3
5.4
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.8
2.4
4.5
6.4
12.2
20.1
53.5
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.3
1.8
2.5
3.3
4.3
5.4
6.5
7.8
9.1
10.6
12.3
14.2
16.5
19.2
22.5
26.4
30.9
35.8
41.1
46.5
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.4
5.2
4.8
4.5
4.1
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.1
2.3
1.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
51.9
57.1
61.9
66.4
70.4
74.2
77.9
81.6
85.4
89.1
92.6
95.7
98.0
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0467
4.4219
0.0018
5.3992
0.0009
0.0237
6.2026
0.0005
0.0136
6.9141
0.0003
0.0083
8.1601
0.0001
0.0035
9.5544
0.0001
0.0013
10.1601
0.0000
0.0009
10.5609
0.0000
0.0007
10.9400
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0035
0.0048
2.4969
0.9023
0.1511
Folk, phi
8.1601
8.1742
1.9770
-0.0681
1.0118
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-27
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF6-GS/TOC
3402945865.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.9
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.5
1.8
2.2
2.7
3.3
3.9
4.6
5.1
5.5
5.7
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.6
2.2
3.9
5.7
12.0
20.9
54.7
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.6
1.0
1.5
2.1
2.8
3.7
4.6
5.6
6.7
7.9
9.2
10.7
12.4
14.6
17.2
20.5
24.4
29.0
34.1
39.6
45.3
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.6
5.4
5.1
4.6
4.2
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.1
2.3
1.6
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
50.9
56.4
61.4
66.1
70.2
74.1
77.8
81.5
85.3
89.0
92.6
95.6
98.0
99.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0415
4.5925
0.0016
5.6439
0.0008
0.0200
6.3907
0.0005
0.0119
7.0352
0.0003
0.0076
8.2083
0.0001
0.0034
9.5631
0.0001
0.0013
10.1667
0.0000
0.0009
10.5652
0.0000
0.0007
10.9457
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0034
0.0045
2.4015
0.8817
0.1629
Folk, phi
8.2083
8.2552
1.9066
-0.0505
1.0301
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-28
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF7-GS/TOC
3402945867.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
2.0
2.3
2.7
3.2
3.8
4.3
4.8
5.1
5.2
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.7
2.9
5.2
6.8
11.9
19.4
53.2
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.7
1.1
1.8
2.6
3.6
4.7
6.0
7.4
8.8
10.3
11.8
13.6
15.5
17.8
20.5
23.7
27.4
31.7
36.5
41.6
46.8
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.2
5.1
4.8
4.5
4.1
3.9
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.7
3.5
3.0
2.2
1.4
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
52.0
57.1
61.9
66.4
70.5
74.4
78.1
81.9
85.8
89.5
93.0
96.0
98.2
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0506
4.3056
0.0020
5.2064
0.0011
0.0271
6.0551
0.0006
0.0150
6.8415
0.0003
0.0087
8.1518
0.0001
0.0035
9.5414
0.0001
0.0013
10.1339
0.0000
0.0009
10.5307
0.0000
0.0007
10.9120
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0035
0.0050
2.5491
0.9466
0.1397
Folk, phi
8.1518
8.1136
2.0207
-0.0963
1.0028
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-29
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF8-GS/TOC
3402945869.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.4
2.8
3.2
3.7
4.2
4.6
4.9
5.0
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.2
4.1
6.2
7.7
12.2
18.8
49.7
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.8
1.4
2.1
3.0
4.1
5.4
6.8
8.4
10.0
11.6
13.4
15.2
17.2
19.3
21.7
24.5
27.8
31.5
35.7
40.4
45.3
50.3
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
4.9
4.7
4.4
4.1
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.3
2.8
2.1
1.3
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
55.2
59.9
64.3
68.4
72.2
75.8
79.3
82.8
86.5
90.0
93.3
96.2
98.3
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0659
3.9239
0.0026
4.7527
0.0015
0.0371
5.6039
0.0008
0.0206
6.5399
0.0004
0.0107
7.9865
0.0002
0.0039
9.4457
0.0001
0.0014
10.0798
0.0000
0.0009
10.4969
0.0000
0.0007
10.8899
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0039
0.0061
2.7376
0.9912
0.1279
Folk, phi
7.9865
7.8901
2.1744
-0.1155
0.9825
Job #2560
Inches
0.0002
0.0002
F-30
Sediment
P-S3/13-TF9-GS/TOC
3402945871.00
BH-63807
20
100
18
90
16
80
14
70
12
60
6/8
10
8/10
10/20
20/40
40/60
50
Wentworth
Size
Class
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
Granule 0.078740
VCg Sand 0.066212
0.055678
0.046819
0.039370
Cg Sand 0.033106
0.027839
0.023410
0.019685
Mg Sand 0.016553
0.013919
0.011705
0.009843
Fg Sand 0.008277
0.006960
0.005852
0.004921
Vfg Sand 0.004138
0.003480
0.002926
0.002461
C Silt
0.002069
0.001740
0.001463
0.001230
M Silt
0.001035
0.000870
0.000732
0.000615
F Silt
0.000517
0.000435
0.000366
0.000308
Vf Silt
0.000259
0.000217
0.000183
0.000154
2.00000
1.68179
1.41421
1.18921
1.00000
0.84090
0.70711
0.59460
0.50000
0.42045
0.35355
0.29730
0.25000
0.21022
0.17678
0.14865
0.12500
0.10511
0.08839
0.07433
0.06250
0.05256
0.04419
0.03716
0.03125
0.02628
0.02210
0.01858
0.01563
0.01314
0.01105
0.00929
0.00781
0.00657
0.00552
0.00465
0.00391
Description
Granule
Very Coarse Sand
Coarse Sand
Medium Sand
Fine Sand
Very Fine Sand
Coarse Silt
Medium Silt
Fine Silt
Very Fine Silt
Clay
Phi of
Screen
-
U.S.
Sieve
No.
1.00
0.75
0.50
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
4.25
4.50
4.75
5.00
5.25
5.50
5.75
6.00
6.25
6.50
6.75
7.00
7.25
7.50
7.75
8.00
10
12
14
16
18
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
60
70
80
100
120
140
170
200
230
270
325
400
450
500
635
Sieve
Size
10
18
35
60
120
230
450
Total
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.2
2.5
3.0
3.6
4.1
4.6
5.0
5.2
Volume
Percent
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
2.8
4.9
6.5
11.3
19.0
55.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.5
1.0
1.6
2.3
3.3
4.3
5.5
6.8
8.2
9.6
11.2
12.8
14.7
16.9
19.4
22.5
26.0
30.2
34.8
39.8
45.0
Wentworth
Size
Class
Clay
Percentile
5
10
16
25
50
75
84
90
95
Measure
Median
Mean
Sorting
Skewness
Kurtosis
Mesh Size
Inches
Millimeters
0.000129
0.000109
0.000091
0.000077
0.000065
0.000054
0.000046
0.000038
0.000032
0.000027
0.000023
0.000019
0.000016
0.000014
0.000011
0.000010
0.000008
0.000007
0.000006
0.000005
0.000004
0.000003
0.000003
0.000002
0.000002
0.000002
0.000001
0.000001
0.000001
TOTALS
0.00329
0.00276
0.00232
0.00195
0.00164
0.00138
0.00116
0.00098
0.00082
0.00069
0.00058
0.00049
0.00041
0.00035
0.00029
0.00024
0.00021
0.00017
0.00015
0.00012
0.00010
0.00009
0.00007
0.00006
0.000051
0.000043
0.000036
0.000031
0.000026
Phi of
Screen
U.S.
Sieve
No.
8.25
8.50
8.75
9.00
9.25
9.50
9.75
10.00
10.25
10.50
10.75
11.00
11.25
11.50
11.75
12.00
12.25
12.50
12.75
13.00
13.25
13.51
13.74
14.00
14.26
14.51
14.76
14.98
15.23
0.00003
0.00004
0.00006
0.00009
0.00012
0.00017
0.00024
0.00035
0.00049
0.00069
0.00098
0.00138
0.00195
0.00276
0.00391
0.00552
0.00781
0.01105
0.01563
0.02210
0.03125
0.04419
0.06250
0
0.08839
0
mm
0.12500
10
0.17678
2
0.25000
20
0.35355
4
0.70711
30
1.00000
6
1.41421
40
2.00000
8
0.50000
+
Client ID:
Sample ID:
File:
Incremental
Volume,
percent
Cumulative
Volume,
percent
5.3
5.2
4.9
4.6
4.3
4.0
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
3.6
3.1
2.3
1.5
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
50.3
55.5
60.4
65.0
69.3
73.3
77.2
81.2
85.2
89.1
92.7
95.8
98.1
99.6
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
Phi
Particle Size
Value
Inches
Millimeters
0.0477
4.3898
0.0019
5.3120
0.0010
0.0252
6.1531
0.0006
0.0141
6.9312
0.0003
0.0082
8.2355
0.0001
0.0033
9.6085
0.0001
0.0013
10.1750
0.0000
0.0009
10.5609
0.0000
0.0007
10.9316
0.0000
0.0005
Trask, mm
0.0033
0.0047
2.5291
0.9534
0.1410
Folk, phi
8.2355
8.1879
1.9967
-0.1056
1.0014
Job #2560
Inches
0.0001
0.0002
F-31
APPENDIX G
Sediment Total Organic Carbon Analytical Data Sheets
G-1
G-2
P-S3/13-TF1-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF2-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF3-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF4-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF5-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF6-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF7-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF8-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-TF9-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A1-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A2-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A3-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A4-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A5-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A6-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-A7-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-B1-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-B2-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-B3-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-B4-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-C1-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-C2-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-C3-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-C4-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-D1-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-D2-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-D3-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-E1-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-E2-GS/TOC
P-S3/13-E3-GS/TOC
County
Top
depth
()
Notes:
NOPR - Normal Preparation
State
Formation
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sand
Sample
Type
TOC,
wt. %
0.45
0.50
0.47
0.44
0.52
0.45
0.51
0.49
0.48
0.71
0.47
0.46
0.45
0.40
0.54
0.05
0.69
0.78
0.80
0.54
0.60
0.63
0.60
0.74
0.56
0.53
0.59
0.46
0.46
0.49
Prep
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
NOPR
TOC
TOC
TOC
TOC
TOC
TOC
TOC
TOC
Verified
Comments
EXT - Extracted Rock
3402945855
3402945857
3402945859
3402945861
3402945863
3402945865
3402945867
3402945869
3402945871
3402945873
3402945875
3402945877
3402945879
3402945881
3402945883
3402945885
3402945887
3402945889
3402945891
3402945893
3402945895
3402945897
3402945899
3402945901
3402945903
3402945905
3402945907
3402945909
3402945911
3402945913
Lab Id
Project # : BH-63807
Geochemical Services Group, 143 Vision Park Blvd., Shenandoah, Texas 77384 • Phone: 281-681-2200 • Fax: 281-681-0326 • Email: [email protected]
Well Name
Client ID
Company : CSA INTERNATIONAL, INC.
TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON
APPENDIX H
Sediment Total Metals Analytical Data Sheets
H-1
H-2
$JSSP
$O
$VSSP
%DSSP
%HSSP
&GSSP
&USSP
&XSSP
)H
/2'&
-RE
367)
9HUVLRQ 3ULQWHG'DWH -RE
367)
1R (
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
-RE
367)
'LJLWDOO\VLJQHGE\ (ULND<RPWRY'HSDUWPHQW0DQDJHU
.DULQD6WHLQIHOG/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
-RE
367)
76 :%6
ʵʥʧʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʩʮʺʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
6$3ʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʤʬʡʷʪʩʸʠʺ
ʭʥʩʱʪʩʸʠʺ
(ULND<RPWRY'HSDUWPHQW0DQDJHU
$SSURYHGE\
5HPDUNV
-RE
367)
-RE
367)
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
$QDO\WLFDO
,QRUJDQLF
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
-RE
367)
-RE
367)
(ULND<RPWRY
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
-RE
367)
&6$2&($16&,(1&(6,1& ʤʸʡʧʤʭʹ
.HOO\&KULV ʸʹʷʹʩʠʭʹ
ʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʮ
ʣʩʩʰʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʷʴ
ʱʮ
FNHOO\#FRQVKHOIFRP ʩʰʥʸʨʷʬʠʸʠʥʣ
.$16$66:)ORULGD
ʺʩʰʥʡʹʧʧʥʬʹʮʺʡʥʺʫ
H-3
1LSSP
3ESSP
6ESSP
6HSSP
7OSSP
9SSP
=QSSP
-RE
367)
-RE
367)
-RE
367)
367)
1R (
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
-RE
367)
(ULND<RPWRY'HSDUWPHQW0DQDJHU
$SSURYHGE\
5HPDUNV
(QGRI5HSRUW
-RE
367)
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
-RE
367)
-RE
367)
(ULND<RPWRY
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
-RE
367)
H-4
$JSSP
$O
$VSSP
%DSSP
%HSSP
&GSSP
&USSP
&XSSP
)H
/2'&
1LSSP
-RE
36$
9HUVLRQ 3DJHRI
3ULQWHG'DWH -RE
36$
1R (
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
-RE
36$
-RE
36$
76 :%6
ʵʥʧʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʩʮʺʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
6$3ʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʤʬʡʷʪʩʸʠʺ
ʭʥʩʱʪʩʸʠʺ
$SSURYHGE\
5HPDUNV
-RE
36$
,QRUJDQLF
-RE
36$
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
-RE
36$
(ULND<RPWRY
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
&6$2&($16&,(1&(6,1& ʤʸʡʧʤʭʹ
ʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʮ
ʣʩʩʰʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʷʴ
ʱʮ
.$16$66:)ORULGD
H-5
3ESSP
6ESSP
6HSSP
7OSSP
9SSP
=QSSP
-RE
36$
-RE
36$
-RE
36$
9HUVLRQ 3DJHRI
3ULQWHG'DWH -RE
36$
1R (
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
-RE
36$
$SSURYHGE\
5HPDUNV
(QGRI5HSRUW
-RE
36$
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
-RE
36$
(ULND<RPWRY
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
H-6
GRQH
$JSSP
$O
$VSSP
%DSSP
%HSSP
&GSSP
&USSP
&XSSP
)H
/2'&
GRQH
GRQH
GRQH
-RE
36&
9HUVLRQ 3ULQWHG'DWH GRQH
-RE
36&
1R (
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
-RE
36%
GRQH
-RE
36%
76 :%6
ʵʥʧʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʩʮʺʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
6$3ʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʤʬʡʷʪʩʸʠʺ
ʭʥʩʱʪʩʸʠʺ
$SSURYHGE\
5HPDUNV
-RE
36%
-RE
36%
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
$QDO\WLFDO
,QRUJDQLF
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
GRQH
-RE
36&
GRQH
-RE
36&
(ULND<RPWRY
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
&6$2&($16&,(1&(6,1& ʤʸʡʧʤʭʹ
ʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʮ
ʣʩʩʰʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʷʴ
ʱʮ
.$16$66:)ORULGD
H-7
1LSSP
3ESSP
6ESSP
6HSSP
7OSSP
9SSP
=QSSP
-RE
36%
-RE
36%
-RE
36&
36&
1R (
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
-RE
36%
$SSURYHGE\
5HPDUNV
(QGRI5HSRUW
-RE
36%
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
-RE
36&
-RE
36&
(ULND<RPWRY
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
$QDO\WLFDO5HSRUW
1R (
&6$2&($16&,(1&(6,1& ʤʸʡʧʤʭʹ
ʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʮ
ʣʩʩʰʯʥʴʬʨ
ʱʷʴ
ʱʮ
.$16$66:)ORULGD
76 :%6
ʵʥʧʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʩʮʺʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
6$3ʺʰʮʦʤ
ʱʮ
ʤʬʡʷʪʩʸʠʺ
ʭʥʩʱʪʩʸʠʺ
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
,0,$QDO\WLFDO'HS
9HUVLRQ $QDO\WLFDO
,QRUJDQLF
-RE
36'
-RE
36'
-RE
36'
-RE
36(
-RE
36(
-RE
36(
$JSSP
$O
$VSSP
%DSSP
%HSSP
&GSSP
&USSP
&XSSP
)H
/2'&
1LSSP
3ESSP
6ESSP
6HSSP
7OSSP
9SSP
=QSSP
,0,6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1R
&XVWRPHU6DPSOH1DPH
(QGRI5HSRUW
5HPDUNV
$SSURYHGE\
/DERUDWRU\0DQDJHU
(ULND<RPWRY
'LJLWDOO\6LJQHGE\ (ULND<RPWRY'HSDUWPHQW0DQDJHU
3ULQWHG'DWH H-8
APPENDIX I
Sediment Hydrocarbons Analytical Data Sheets
I-1
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
Sample Dry Weight (g)
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2072.D
P-S3/13-TF1
Sediment
03/25/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/23/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
31
69
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
<0.018
<0.045
<0.016
<0.013
<0.004
0.013
0.016
0.021
0.013
0.010
0.038
0.016
0.028
0.020
0.036
0.013
0.041
0.063
0.037
0.020
0.103
0.009
0.266
0.042
0.271
0.017
0.162
0.035
0.081
0.020
0.055
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
CSA2073.D
P-S3/13-TF2
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/23/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
35
65
1X
Q
CSA2074.D
P-S3/13-TF3
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
<0.019
<0.045
<0.016
<0.013
<0.004
<0.016
<0.004
<0.004
0.013
0.004
0.040
0.006
0.020
0.023
0.006
0.011
0.024
0.042
0.039
0.030
0.125
0.041
0.277
0.053
0.323
0.024
0.167
0.027
0.092
0.025
0.065
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
U
U
U
CSA2075.D
P-S3/13-TF4
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
33
67
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
<0.018
<0.045
<0.016
<0.013
<0.004
0.021
0.036
0.004
0.019
0.011
0.052
0.016
0.033
0.021
0.026
0.025
0.034
0.049
0.069
0.034
0.113
0.029
0.247
0.041
0.273
0.016
0.154
0.013
0.085
<0.016
<0.017
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
U
U
U
CSA2076.D
P-S3/13-TF5
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
<0.018
<0.045
<0.016
0.022
0.005
0.018
0.025
0.002
0.013
0.006
0.035
0.005
0.014
0.019
0.010
0.011
0.022
0.039
0.030
0.024
0.106
0.020
0.250
0.041
0.267
0.020
0.165
0.024
0.081
0.026
0.047
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.010
0.014
0.006
0.011
0.003
0.010
0.019
0.003
0.014
0.007
0.036
0.005
0.017
0.025
0.015
0.012
0.028
0.044
0.053
0.025
0.119
0.046
0.262
0.043
0.309
0.024
0.166
0.039
0.104
0.037
0.066
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
U
U
U
Total Alkanes
1.44
1.48
1.42
1.35
1.57
21.2
6.90
14.2
55.5
2.93
52.5
41.2
5.43
35.7
13.9
2.29
11.6
24.0
2.88
21.1
EOM (Pg/dry g)
92.0 J
Surrogate (Su)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
64 J
74 J
42 J
J
J
U
U
U
44 J
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
84
96
88
85
90
83
94
100
93
88
94
87
90
100
94
U
U
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
I-2
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2077.D
P-S3/13-TF6
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
29
71
1X
CSA2078.D
P-S3/13-TF7
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.023
0.028
0.004
0.022
0.003
0.017
0.022
0.003
0.017
0.008
0.050
0.007
0.022
0.018
0.017
0.013
0.026
0.045
0.053
0.029
0.124
0.047
0.291
0.036
0.328
0.021
0.187
0.029
0.094
0.021
0.063
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
CSA2079.D
P-S3/13-TF8
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.017
0.020
0.006
0.017
0.003
0.011
0.015
0.003
0.015
0.006
0.044
0.006
0.020
0.025
0.014
0.012
0.023
0.041
0.047
0.024
0.117
0.041
0.270
0.038
0.320
0.025
0.181
0.032
0.109
0.040
0.069
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
J
J
U
U
U
CSA2080.D
P-S3/13-TF9
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
29
71
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
J
J
J
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.019
0.026
0.007
0.022
0.005
0.019
0.022
0.004
0.017
0.007
0.043
0.009
0.022
0.020
0.018
0.013
0.029
0.043
0.055
0.025
0.119
0.043
0.265
0.039
0.308
0.039
0.171
0.033
0.113
0.032
0.061
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
J
U
U
U
CSA2081.D
P-S3/13-A1
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
33
67
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.026
0.029
0.005
0.026
0.004
0.017
0.023
0.005
0.020
0.008
0.057
0.009
0.026
0.028
0.013
0.014
0.026
0.041
0.048
0.029
0.118
0.043
0.287
0.045
0.324
0.028
0.202
0.036
0.116
0.043
0.076
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.015
0.009
0.006
0.007
0.003
0.010
0.016
0.004
0.055
0.012
0.063
0.005
0.021
0.031
0.060
0.021
0.032
0.047
0.059
0.034
0.148
0.037
0.299
0.049
0.430
0.048
0.379
0.028
0.180
0.010
0.042
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
J
U
U
U
Total Alkanes
1.67
1.61
1.65
1.77
2.16
29.1
4.10
25.0
8.85
3.13
5.71
28.0
3.85
24.1
11.2
4.19
6.99
49.5
8.25
41.3
EOM (Pg/dry g)
Surrogate (Su)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
54 J
56 J
56 J
60 J
J
J
U
U
U
97 J
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
94
99
94
89
97
92
86
96
88
93
98
92
85
96
90
U
U
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
I-3
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2082.D
P-S3/13-A2
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
33
67
1X
CSA2083.D
P-S3/13-A3
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
45
55
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.022
0.012
0.006
0.007
0.004
0.010
0.009
0.006
0.041
0.009
0.056
0.004
0.021
0.034
0.040
0.025
0.026
0.040
0.050
0.026
0.136
0.032
0.272
0.038
0.380
0.012
0.314
0.017
0.139
0.009
0.028
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
CSA2084.D
P-S3/13-A4
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
50
50
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.032
0.048
0.009
0.035
0.003
0.031
0.033
0.006
0.043
0.009
0.063
0.007
0.023
0.041
0.018
0.021
0.021
0.036
0.042
0.024
0.115
0.030
0.240
0.042
0.328
0.044
0.254
0.006
0.131
0.010
0.022
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
U
U
CSA2085.D
P-S3/13-A5
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.0
51
49
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
<0.018
0.018
0.006
0.009
0.002
0.011
0.008
0.005
0.047
0.007
0.048
0.005
0.017
0.023
0.036
0.011
0.011
0.029
0.017
0.025
0.106
0.024
0.226
0.034
0.307
0.031
0.253
0.021
0.124
0.009
0.029
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
J
J
U
U
U
CSA2086.D
P-S3/13-A6
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
ALIFRONT.M
15.1
59
41
1X
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
U
J
J
J
J
J
Q
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.013
0.015
0.006
0.009
0.004
0.014
0.009
0.002
0.047
0.010
0.068
0.004
0.028
0.052
0.089
0.013
0.019
0.057
0.037
0.021
0.082
0.019
0.231
0.040
0.284
0.024
0.291
0.028
0.113
<0.016
<0.017
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
&RQFȝJGU\J
U
U
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
Q
<0.012
<0.021
0.012
0.042
0.103
0.013
0.078
0.005
0.037
0.046
0.003
0.029
0.009
0.098
0.011
0.043
0.085
0.015
0.020
0.016
0.036
0.018
0.034
0.101
0.030
0.215
0.037
0.278
0.019
0.241
0.014
0.130
<0.016
<0.017
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
Total Alkanes
1.83
1.77
1.50
1.63
1.82
17.1
7.49
9.58
85.6
8.04
77.6
77.0
8.23
68.8
46.7
8.60
38.0
55.5
8.20
47.3
EOM (Pg/dry g)
Surrogate (Su)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
88 J
90 J
94 J
92 J
J
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
88 J
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
84
97
92
90
100
96
93
96
98
90
96
97
92
97
96
U
U
J
I-4
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
Israel Project #2560
CSA2087.D
P-S3/13-A7
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/29/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
78
22
1X
<0.012
0.003
0.003
0.005
0.004
0.005
0.002
0.001
0.003
0.009
0.012
0.004
0.003
0.007
0.002
0.005
0.003
0.013
0.004
0.005
0.015
0.023
0.007
0.010
0.012
0.020
0.004
0.016
0.002
0.023
<0.016
<0.015
<0.016
<0.017
<0.019
<0.019
<0.019
CSA2090.D
P-S3/13-B3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.1
32
68
1X
CSA2091.D
P-S3/13-B4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.3
28
72
1X
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
<0.021
0.004
0.013
0.021
0.008
0.016
0.007
0.024
0.024
0.017
0.025
0.029
0.071
0.012
0.031
0.031
0.092
0.019
0.036
0.035
0.068
0.039
0.166
0.050
0.329
0.075
0.446
0.081
0.372
0.036
0.328
0.034
0.135
0.023
0.073
0.039
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.006
0.006
0.015
0.024
0.011
0.021
0.010
0.030
0.032
0.015
0.040
0.032
0.080
0.014
0.036
0.040
0.106
0.021
0.045
0.046
0.082
0.057
0.186
0.063
0.398
0.087
0.488
0.095
0.548
0.081
0.470
0.048
0.152
0.034
0.093
0.036
U
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.004
0.008
0.015
0.016
0.009
0.015
0.010
0.033
0.023
0.016
0.041
0.045
0.098
0.013
0.039
0.040
0.133
0.024
0.051
0.043
0.080
0.050
0.208
0.044
0.396
0.075
0.527
0.118
0.566
0.040
0.270
0.039
0.157
0.015
0.084
0.050
U
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.005
0.007
0.014
0.015
0.008
0.011
0.010
0.029
0.020
0.012
0.039
0.038
0.088
0.011
0.030
0.031
0.107
0.023
0.042
0.045
0.080
0.049
0.188
0.061
0.379
0.049
0.464
0.083
0.406
0.045
0.169
0.031
0.160
0.029
0.085
0.048
J
0.229
2.81
3.55
3.40
2.91
10.8
2.3
8.5
20.5
14.4
6.0
39.6
16.6
23.0
30.0
17.4
12.6
33.1
19.0
14.1
104
107
122
110
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
79
97
88
81
94
90
73
84
78
69
80
74
75
84
79
Total Alkanes
EOM (Pg/dry g)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
CSA2089.D
P-S3/13-B2
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.1
27
73
1X
Su. Corrected Q Su. Corrected Q Su. Corrected Q Su. Corrected Q Su. Corrected Q
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
Surrogate (Su)
CSA2088.D
P-S3/13-B1
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
38
62
1X
8.0 J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
I-5
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
I-6
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2092.D
P-S3/13-C1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
CSA2093.D
P-S3/13-C2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
CSA2094.D
P-S3/13-C3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
CSA2095.D
P-S3/13-C4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.3
33
67
1X
CSA2096.D
P-S3/13-D1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
32
68
1X
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
<0.012
0.006
0.006
0.011
0.015
0.007
0.009
0.007
0.012
0.020
0.012
0.013
0.005
0.038
0.005
0.020
0.021
0.024
0.017
0.029
0.038
0.051
0.032
0.108
0.044
0.230
0.060
0.323
0.070
0.256
0.064
0.119
0.053
0.084
0.055
0.060
0.053
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.007
0.008
0.013
0.018
0.008
0.013
0.008
0.025
0.023
<0.004
0.033
0.005
0.035
0.007
0.022
0.025
0.022
0.018
0.027
0.042
0.043
0.030
0.106
0.043
0.243
0.060
0.291
0.062
0.233
0.060
0.130
0.052
0.077
0.047
0.058
0.048
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.007
0.007
0.014
0.012
0.007
0.009
0.009
0.016
0.021
0.018
0.014
0.005
0.041
0.005
0.021
0.014
0.032
0.021
0.035
0.048
0.060
0.041
0.119
0.051
0.264
0.078
0.349
0.074
0.310
0.083
0.119
0.055
0.094
0.065
0.067
0.069
U
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
<0.021
<0.016
0.009
0.008
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.008
0.016
0.008
0.012
0.005
0.023
0.003
0.012
0.014
0.020
0.011
0.020
0.026
0.033
0.023
0.079
0.036
0.153
0.043
0.214
0.040
0.171
0.033
0.067
0.020
0.042
0.017
0.031
0.025
J
J
U
U
U
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.009
0.011
0.019
0.019
0.011
0.013
0.011
0.026
0.032
0.026
0.017
0.013
0.046
0.007
0.028
0.020
0.030
0.026
0.041
0.056
0.067
0.037
0.134
0.063
0.321
0.076
0.382
0.076
0.278
0.095
0.143
0.059
0.100
0.072
0.076
0.076
J
J
J
Total Alkanes
1.97
1.94
2.25
1.24
2.52
40.4
5.4
35.0
4.2
2.6
1.5
11.4
4.6
6.8
8.0
3.2
4.8
11.5
5.7
5.7
EOM (Pg/dry g)
Surrogate (Su)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
22 J
42 J
46 J
20 J
J
J
12 J
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
72
82
75
53
60
54
48
57
52
52
65
62
49
54
49
U
J
J
I-7
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
I-8
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2097.D
P-S3/13-D2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.1
34
66
1X
CSA2098.D
P-S3/13-D3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
CSA2099.D
P-S3/13-E1
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
33
67
1X
CSA2100.D
P-S3/13-E2
Sediment
03/31/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.0
34
66
1X
CSA2101.D
P-S3/13-E3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
ALI2012.M
15.2
29
71
1X
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
&RQFȝJGU\J
<0.012
0.005
0.007
0.014
0.018
0.008
0.011
0.008
0.013
0.018
0.014
0.013
0.007
0.034
0.006
0.017
0.029
0.018
0.014
0.026
0.037
0.049
0.030
0.115
0.043
0.262
0.055
0.320
0.042
0.216
0.049
0.115
0.034
0.064
0.034
0.041
0.039
n-C9
n-C10
n-C11
n-C12
n-C13
i-C15
n-C14
i-C16
n-C15
n-C16
i-C18
n-C17
Pristane
n-C18
Phytane
n-C19
n-C20
n-C21
n-C22
n-C23
n-C24
n-C25
n-C26
n-C27
n-C28
n-C29
n-C30
n-C31
n-C32
n-C33
n-C34
n-C35
n-C36
n-C37
n-C38
n-C39
n-C40
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.007
0.007
0.014
0.020
0.008
0.014
0.007
0.014
0.048
0.014
0.011
0.007
0.037
0.007
0.017
0.027
0.020
0.018
0.028
0.038
0.051
0.031
0.121
0.045
0.277
0.060
0.353
0.060
0.247
0.058
0.105
0.045
0.074
0.053
0.055
0.049
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.006
0.006
0.015
0.017
0.008
0.012
0.008
0.012
0.033
0.012
0.011
0.006
0.029
0.005
0.018
0.024
0.012
0.014
0.027
0.030
0.047
0.030
0.105
0.045
0.251
0.048
0.281
0.041
0.183
0.036
0.074
0.026
0.044
0.029
0.036
0.029
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
0.007
0.006
0.011
0.011
0.008
0.010
0.007
0.014
0.018
0.012
0.011
0.006
0.031
0.006
0.018
0.020
0.013
0.012
0.023
0.030
0.046
0.029
0.106
0.040
0.238
0.054
0.306
0.051
0.189
0.049
0.085
0.042
0.063
0.045
0.050
0.051
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
J
J
<0.012
<0.021
0.005
0.008
0.010
0.006
0.006
<0.004
0.006
0.014
<0.004
0.006
0.004
0.022
0.003
0.011
0.019
0.011
0.010
0.020
0.029
0.039
0.023
0.091
0.034
0.196
0.034
0.241
0.037
0.165
0.037
0.081
0.023
0.042
0.027
0.030
0.027
J
U
U
J
J
J
J
J
U
J
U
J
Total Alkanes
1.83
2.05
1.61
1.72
1.32
17.7
4.9
12.8
16.2
5.2
11.0
7.3
3.7
3.6
10.7
3.2
7.5
<1.38 U
3.5
<1.38 U
EOM (Pg/dry g)
Surrogate (Su)
n-dodecane-d26
n-eicosane-d42
n-triacontane-d62
42 J
52 J
30 J
36 J
24 J
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
Su Recovery (%)
80
88
81
66
71
65
60
67
61
76
84
78
70
79
73
I-9
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
I-10
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
2560 Israel Project
CSA2072.D
P-S3/13-TF1
Sediment
03/25/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
31
69
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.51
1.03
1.09
1.48
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.376
0.276
0.372
0.489
0.346
0.308
<0.4
<0.4
0.241
0.257
2.03
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.287
0.274
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.29
1.78
1.55
1.76
1.02
2.22
0.835
1.09
1.37
0.852
<0.3
1.21
1.70
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.16
1.05
0.280
1.70
1.24
0.870
2.13
0.469
2.06
41.0
CSA2073.D
P-S3/13-TF2
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
35
65
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.57
1.41
1.61
1.51
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.416
0.263
0.513
0.767
0.586
0.459
<0.4
<0.4
0.328
0.245
3.25
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.282
<0.2
2.56
1.91
1.23
1.00
0.647
0.857
0.530
0.845
1.14
0.697
<0.3
1.25
1.99
1.02
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.32
1.06
0.258
1.60
1.20
0.893
2.20
<0.1
2.22
41.6
CSA2074.D
P-S3/13-TF3
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.58
1.24
1.75
1.83
1.00
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.414
0.209
0.835
0.890
0.743
0.569
<0.4
<0.4
0.290
0.157
4.37
4.78
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.389
0.363
<0.2
0.485
<0.2
2.17
1.37
0.965
1.08
<0.5
<0.5
0.490
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.734
1.17
0.677
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.19
0.648
0.228
1.12
0.681
0.420
1.47
0.310
1.38
39.0
CSA2075.D
P-S3/13-TF4
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
33
67
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.41
1.14
1.38
1.35
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.558
0.288
0.423
0.710
0.518
0.450
<0.4
<0.4
0.289
0.213
3.05
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.242
0.249
<0.2
0.255
<0.2
2.21
1.59
1.04
0.674
0.434
0.588
0.502
0.624
0.695
0.481
<0.3
1.02
1.53
0.712
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.07
0.976
0.240
1.51
1.09
0.805
1.92
0.479
1.98
36.7
CSA2076.D
P-S3/13-TF5
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.76
1.25
1.47
1.42
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.496
0.388
0.582
0.647
0.483
0.404
<0.4
<0.4
0.380
0.254
3.06
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.277
0.305
<0.2
0.448
<0.2
2.95
2.13
1.48
1.20
0.886
0.943
0.723
0.871
1.17
0.724
<0.3
1.45
2.17
1.17
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
4.22
1.32
0.317
2.06
1.53
1.25
2.78
0.639
2.81
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
48.4
I-11
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
2560 Israel Project
CSA2072.D
P-S3/13-TF1
Sediment
03/25/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
31
69
1X
Target Compounds
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
1.18
0.500
0.672
0.193
0.236
0.185
0.126
0.043
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.192
0.169
32.0
2.60
34.5
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
CSA2073.D
P-S3/13-TF2
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
35
65
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
J
J
1.59
0.718
0.842
0.143
0.304
0.194
0.136
0.039
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.185
0.183
11.4
3.58
14.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2074.D
P-S3/13-TF3
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
1.43
0.599
0.943
0.134
0.416
0.248
0.150
0.071
0.528
0.616
3.59
0.206
0.395
<0.1
<0.2
0.133
0.120
18.8
2.60
19.8
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2075.D
P-S3/13-TF4
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
33
67
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
1.30
0.572
0.693
0.053
0.270
0.170
0.120
0.032
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.150
0.142
9.34
2.63
12.2
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2076.D
P-S3/13-TF5
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
1.44
0.608
0.766
0.083
0.257
0.202
0.149
0.043
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.225
0.208
18.2
3.92
22.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
72
83
82
83
46
72
80
78
80
44
78
87
87
86
37
75
83
83
84
50
77
85
85
90
54
I-12
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
2560 Israel Project
CSA2077.D
P-S3/13-TF6
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.03
1.74
2.28
2.12
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.830
0.348
0.867
1.08
0.851
0.678
<0.4
<0.4
0.447
0.371
5.19
5.62
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.414
0.465
<0.2
0.475
<0.2
3.85
2.81
1.89
1.58
0.860
0.890
0.811
0.942
1.14
0.887
<0.3
1.73
2.69
1.38
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
5.08
1.54
0.48
2.48
1.91
1.60
3.28
0.773
3.32
67.7
CSA2078.D
P-S3/13-TF7
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.86
1.34
1.76
1.69
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.745
0.318
0.692
0.914
0.633
0.522
<0.4
<0.4
0.357
0.276
3.82
4.63
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.319
0.357
<0.2
0.443
<0.2
3.08
2.28
1.52
0.932
0.560
0.827
0.684
0.814
0.902
0.889
<0.3
1.46
2.34
1.19
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
4.05
1.32
0.350
2.01
1.47
1.38
2.65
0.649
2.81
54.8
CSA2079.D
P-S3/13-TF8
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.64
1.39
1.88
1.84
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.696
0.332
0.696
0.962
0.628
0.552
<0.4
<0.4
0.370
0.261
4.08
5.02
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.353
0.403
<0.2
0.505
<0.2
3.03
2.16
1.46
1.09
0.856
0.932
0.756
0.883
1.11
0.811
<0.3
1.31
2.07
1.30
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
4.41
1.33
0.393
2.13
1.49
1.70
2.93
0.690
2.84
57.3
CSA2080.D
P-S3/13-TF9
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
29
71
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.88
1.51
2.05
1.98
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.593
0.320
1.02
1.00
0.851
0.761
<0.4
<0.4
0.372
0.279
4.97
5.06
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.366
0.422
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.02
2.08
1.31
1.16
0.744
0.830
0.728
0.802
0.928
0.756
<0.3
1.25
2.03
1.00
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
4.00
1.27
0.299
1.96
1.32
1.17
2.63
0.614
2.57
55.9
CSA2081.D
P-S3/13-A1
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
33
67
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.79
1.23
1.61
1.56
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.71
0.331
0.491
1.72
0.621
0.694
<0.4
<0.4
0.651
0.950
4.01
5.92
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.475
0.764
<0.2
1.65
<0.2
4.67
3.75
3.21
2.82
1.32
1.43
0.753
0.810
1.20
0.914
<0.3
2.06
3.05
1.62
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
4.23
1.20
0.313
1.92
1.36
101
1.56
0.410
2.15
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
169
I-13
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
2560 Israel Project
CSA2077.D
P-S3/13-TF6
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2078.D
P-S3/13-TF7
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
29
71
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2079.D
P-S3/13-TF8
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2080.D
P-S3/13-TF9
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
29
71
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2081.D
P-S3/13-A1
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
33
67
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
Q
2.02
0.824
1.17
0.132
0.461
0.315
0.210
0.076
0.653
0.806
3.97
0.310
0.524
<0.1
<0.2
0.276
0.298
14.2
<0.6
17.1
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
1.54
0.646
0.874
0.272
0.331
0.235
0.163
0.064
0.465
0.591
3.56
0.184
0.366
<0.1
<0.2
0.245
0.214
14.2
<0.6
17.8
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.60
0.679
0.933
0.103
0.367
0.284
0.177
0.059
0.515
0.643
3.84
0.198
0.397
<0.1
<0.2
0.229
0.190
19.3
<0.6
22.7
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.74
0.726
1.07
0.338
0.482
0.294
0.182
0.069
0.679
0.731
3.54
0.235
0.455
<0.1
<0.2
0.201
0.186
13.6
<0.6
14.0
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.40
0.614
0.903
0.027
0.521
0.573
0.268
0.146
0.842
0.871
4.02
0.258
0.617
<0.1
<0.2
0.471
0.762
18.6
1.84
17.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
79
85
84
87
50
76
82
82
86
49
74
82
81
79
50
78
85
84
87
42
76
86
85
91
76
I-14
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
2560 Israel Project
CSA2082.D
P-S3/13-A2
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
33
67
1X
CSA2083.D
P-S3/13-A3
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
45
55
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.26
1.03
1.23
1.24
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.23
0.317
0.484
1.26
0.471
0.450
<0.4
<0.4
0.601
0.689
3.67
4.99
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.407
0.611
<0.2
1.36
0.450
4.47
3.52
3.02
2.49
1.28
1.30
0.749
0.969
1.61
1.34
<0.3
2.06
2.92
1.64
0.936
<0.2
<0.2
4.27
1.25
0.334
2.01
1.42
61.9
1.67
0.465
2.18
127
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2084.D
P-S3/13-A4
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
50
50
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.55
1.97
1.85
1.87
0.991
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.15
0.261
0.685
1.55
0.842
0.563
<0.4
<0.4
0.58
0.457
4.71
4.94
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.368
0.476
<0.2
0.934
<0.2
4.72
3.54
2.92
1.92
0.928
1.05
0.728
0.579
0.712
0.503
<0.3
2.17
2.58
1.50
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.70
1.15
0.353
2.04
1.85
47.7
1.58
0.474
2.11
112
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.85
1.06
1.09
1.14
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.18
0.216
0.400
1.06
0.485
0.393
<0.4
<0.4
0.597
0.682
3.36
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.337
0.405
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
5.14
4.23
3.44
2.19
0.897
0.964
0.937
0.622
0.862
0.693
<0.3
2.95
3.01
1.38
0.511
<0.2
<0.2
4.43
1.42
0.416
2.14
2.13
42.5
1.76
0.564
2.05
99.5
CSA2085.D
P-S3/13-A5
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
51
49
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2086.D
P-S3/13-A6
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
59
41
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
5.73
3.06
2.80
2.00
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.34
4.83
1.49
3.54
5.00
1.09
<0.4
<0.4
4.01
4.81
26.4
10.1
8.63
2.25
<0.3
1.49
0.682
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
36.4
29.6
14.6
5.88
2.17
<0.5
5.71
1.86
1.42
1.02
<0.3
29.0
27.4
7.64
1.61
1.10
<0.2
38.6
14.6
4.25
21.2
30.0
36.3
17.1
5.88
18.2
441
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
3.40
2.26
2.51
3.88
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.927
0.273
1.43
2.14
1.74
1.04
1.34
<0.4
1.31
2.41
15.3
8.55
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.959
0.526
<0.2
0.522
<0.2
21.8
14.7
8.52
5.14
1.90
1.31
3.76
1.18
0.801
0.613
<0.3
10.5
8.74
3.48
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
12.6
4.49
1.12
5.73
6.97
32.6
4.50
1.40
5.04
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
207
I-15
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3029
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
2560 Israel Project
CSA2082.D
P-S3/13-A2
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
33
67
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2083.D
P-S3/13-A3
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
45
55
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2084.D
P-S3/13-A4
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
50
50
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2085.D
P-S3/13-A5
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
51
49
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2086.D
P-S3/13-A6
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/18/13
ENV 3004
04/24/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
59
41
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
Q
1.19
0.495
0.666
0.071
0.354
0.448
0.227
0.114
0.647
0.725
3.48
0.191
0.526
<0.1
<0.2
0.403
0.626
19.0
2.95
18.1
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
J
J
2.34
0.890
1.12
0.138
0.398
0.349
0.173
0.093
0.694
0.828
3.23
0.238
0.519
<0.1
<0.2
0.383
0.720
11.9
1.27
10.2
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.23
0.510
0.678
0.121
0.303
0.296
0.152
0.075
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.476
0.905
11.1
1.42
9.84
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
2.91
2.10
1.56
0.160
0.583
0.434
0.333
0.115
2.10
2.20
4.73
0.594
1.62
7.16
<0.2
1.90
4.97
12.1
1.08
9.41
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
2.67
1.02
1.33
0.582
0.713
0.332
0.265
0.082
1.76
1.76
4.40
0.547
1.08
<0.1
<0.2
1.24
2.36
12.8
<0.6
9.31
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
69
78
82
85
68
72
86
89
89
77
76
85
89
93
81
74
85
88
94
81
79
88
86
88
81
I-16
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2087.D
P-S3/13-A7
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
78
22
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.224
0.059
<0.7
<0.7
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.306
<0
<0.1
0.160
0.037
<0.4
<0.4
<0.4
<0.1
0.022
0.178
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.145
0.098
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.160
0.101
0.113
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.158
0.059
<0.1
0.106
0.089
0.296
0.082
0.049
0.111
2.56
CSA2088.D
P-S3/13-B1
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
38
62
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
J
U
U
U
J
J
U
J
J
J
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
3.47
1.55
2.27
2.61
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.80
0.359
0.628
2.0
0.962
0.899
<0.4
<0.4
0.745
0.964
5.12
6.25
10.6
2.34
1.95
0.544
0.659
1.25
1.22
0.461
4.54
3.92
3.59
2.94
1.37
1.43
0.776
0.655
1.12
0.973
<0.3
2.03
2.58
1.86
1.45
0.830
<0.2
3.76
1.02
<0.1
1.53
1.28
129
1.48
0.53
1.88
219
CSA2089.D
P-S3/13-B2
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
27
73
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
4.33
1.85
2.53
2.77
1.29
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.93
0.432
0.881
2.21
1.13
1.11
<0.4
<0.4
0.757
1.03
6.87
7.39
11.5
3.71
2.52
0.654
0.862
1.67
1.90
0.868
5.31
4.41
3.64
3.60
1.69
2.02
0.688
0.816
1.30
1.14
<0.3
2.02
2.90
2.03
1.60
1.36
<0.2
4.19
1.15
<0.1
1.72
1.48
148
1.62
0.509
1.94
255
CSA2090.D
P-S3/13-B3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
32
68
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
4.60
1.88
3.02
2.97
1.97
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.30
0.532
0.851
2.53
1.21
1.03
<0.4
<0.4
0.923
1.30
6.32
7.57
12.7
5.31
2.96
0.66
0.97
1.83
2.34
1.08
6.00
5.18
4.78
4.20
2.15
1.80
0.885
1.04
1.73
1.45
<0.3
2.45
3.35
2.41
2.10
1.44
<0.2
4.80
1.32
<0.1
2.14
1.72
195
1.92
0.588
2.25
317
CSA2091.D
P-S3/13-B4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.3
28
72
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
3.63
1.74
2.62
2.72
1.62
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.18
0.532
0.731
2.40
1.12
1.13
<0.4
<0.4
1.08
1.29
6.60
7.98
11.9
5.57
3.93
0.750
1.03
1.95
2.26
1.06
6.24
5.85
4.54
4.85
1.93
2.35
1.08
1.08
1.59
1.46
<0.3
2.64
3.91
2.65
1.94
1.23
<0.2
4.77
1.30
<0.1
1.96
1.80
181
1.90
0.609
2.23
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
305
I-17
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2087.D
P-S3/13-A7
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
78
22
1X
CSA2088.D
P-S3/13-B1
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
38
62
1X
CSA2089.D
P-S3/13-B2
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
27
73
1X
CSA2090.D
P-S3/13-B3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
32
68
1X
CSA2091.D
P-S3/13-B4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.3
28
72
1X
I-18
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2087.D
P-S3/13-A7
Sediment
03/30/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
78
22
1X
Target Compounds
CSA2088.D
P-S3/13-B1
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
38
62
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
Q
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.062
0.035
<0.3
<0.1
<0.2
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.1
1.57
<0.6
1.38
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
1.85
0.683
1.48
0.231
0.696
0.570
0.285
0.184
0.791
0.850
3.95
0.247
0.611
0.270
0.532
0.460
1.27
10.9
<0.6
10.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2089.D
P-S3/13-B2
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
27
73
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
2.15
0.888
1.49
0.200
0.816
0.783
0.376
0.200
1.05
1.28
3.85
0.539
0.901
1.18
0.546
0.497
1.12
14.8
<0.6
14.7
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2090.D
P-S3/13-B3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
32
68
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
2.20
0.891
1.99
0.248
0.994
0.848
0.437
0.251
1.17
1.22
3.90
0.538
0.974
0.807
0.622
0.593
1.42
16.1
<0.6
15.1
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
CSA2091.D
P-S3/13-B4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.3
28
72
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
2.02
0.819
1.74
0.061
0.977
0.916
0.430
0.274
1.23
1.27
4.42
0.324
0.977
0.411
0.605
0.648
1.40
16.4
<0.6
15.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Q
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
79
88
88
98
91
84
92
94
98
83
74
81
83
84
74
70
78
78
78
68
76
82
82
90
70
I-19
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2092.D
P-S3/13-C1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.87
0.989
1.17
1.23
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.583
0.329
0.503
0.646
0.388
0.379
<0.4
<0.4
0.491
0.34
3.06
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.280
0.327
0.508
0.371
0.185
3.20
2.84
1.86
1.90
1.12
1.16
0.785
1.14
1.35
1.21
<0.3
1.71
2.67
1.60
1.42
0.729
<0.2
4.20
1.36
0.388
1.94
1.57
6.43
2.59
0.747
2.55
60.1
CSA2093.D
P-S3/13-C2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.84
1.28
1.65
1.72
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.634
0.286
0.600
0.811
0.533
0.397
<0.4
<0.4
0.323
0.260
3.36
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.302
0.298
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.82
2.31
1.40
1.26
0.750
0.939
0.797
0.761
0.925
0.838
<0.3
1.45
2.19
1.15
0.872
0.662
<0.2
3.61
1.16
0.290
1.78
1.23
3.54
2.28
0.662
2.20
50.2
CSA2094.D
P-S3/13-C3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.34
1.17
1.31
1.59
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.20
0.294
0.571
0.868
0.405
0.372
<0.4
<0.4
0.622
0.48
3.95
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.329
0.362
0.580
0.560
0.295
5.96
5.22
3.10
2.02
0.940
1.36
1.30
1.15
1.41
1.14
<0.3
2.85
3.92
1.99
1.19
0.955
<0.2
5.95
1.82
0.521
2.68
2.62
10.1
2.99
0.933
3.13
82.6
CSA2095.D
P-S3/13-C4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.3
33
67
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.37
0.631
0.699
1.32
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.584
0.167
0.259
0.562
0.242
0.224
<0.4
<0.4
0.318
0.250
1.76
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.193
0.234
0.456
0.486
<0.2
2.03
1.79
1.20
1.08
0.630
0.789
0.472
0.533
0.692
0.679
<0.3
1.01
1.63
0.768
0.696
0.677
<0.2
2.46
0.759
0.191
1.18
0.849
13.7
1.17
0.419
1.22
46.4
CSA2096.D
P-S3/13-D1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
32
68
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
5.13
5.47
5.17
3.87
2.78
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.88
0.448
0.572
2.50
0.610
0.733
<0.4
<0.4
0.670
0.622
5.68
8.06
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.472
0.649
1.12
0.972
0.429
4.99
4.38
3.70
3.98
2.36
1.72
1.34
1.61
2.19
1.86
<0.3
2.69
4.15
2.92
2.53
1.83
<0.2
5.96
1.92
0.568
2.99
2.07
2.34
3.47
1.09
3.44
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
115
I-20
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2092.D
P-S3/13-C1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
CSA2093.D
P-S3/13-C2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
CSA2094.D
P-S3/13-C3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
CSA2095.D
P-S3/13-C4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.3
33
67
1X
CSA2096.D
P-S3/13-D1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
32
68
1X
I-21
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2092.D
P-S3/13-C1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2093.D
P-S3/13-C2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2094.D
P-S3/13-C3
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
31
69
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2095.D
P-S3/13-C4
Sediment
03/29/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.3
33
67
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2096.D
P-S3/13-D1
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
32
68
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
Q
Individual Alkyl Isomers and Hopa
1.13
0.490
0.673
0.225
0.236
0.271
0.186
0.059
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.283
0.348
11.5
<0.6
13.2
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
J
J
1.45
0.657
0.852
0.246
0.328
0.257
0.161
0.052
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.223
0.259
9.11
<0.6
12.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.31
0.613
0.700
0.091
0.285
0.281
0.203
0.086
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.446
0.721
15.6
<0.6
20.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
0.706
0.329
0.361
0.084
0.197
0.203
0.118
0.048
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.178
0.266
10.1
<0.6
11.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
5.88
3.09
2.46
0.718
0.598
0.519
0.357
0.148
1.25
1.36
3.81
0.697
1.19
<0.1
<0.2
0.653
0.614
17.2
2.50
22.4
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
70
76
77
84
45
55
60
61
67
34
50
56
56
58
37
53
58
59
64
51
51
55
56
64
30
I-22
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2097.D
P-S3/13-D2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
34
66
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
cis/trans Decalin
C1-Decalins
C2-Decalins
C3-Decalins
C4-Decalins
Naphthalene
C1-Naphthalenes
C2-Naphthalenes
C3-Naphthalenes
C4-Naphthalenes
Benzothiophene
C1-Benzothiophenes
C2-Benzothiophenes
C3-Benzothiophenes
C4-Benzothiophenes
Biphenyl
Acenaphthylene
Acenaphthene
Dibenzofuran
Fluorene
C1-Fluorenes
C2-Fluorenes
C3-Fluorenes
Carbazole
Anthracene
Phenanthrene
Dibenzothiophene
C4-Dibenzothiophene
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Benz(a)anthracene
C1-Chrysenes
C2-Chrysenes
C3-Chrysenes
C4-Chrysenes
Benzo(e)pyrene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Perylene
Total PAHs
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.05
1.46
1.62
1.47
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.697
0.327
0.527
0.748
0.498
0.391
<0.4
<0.4
0.434
0.282
3.38
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.290
0.295
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.11
2.69
1.59
1.45
0.801
0.825
0.725
0.748
0.811
0.754
<0.3
1.59
2.46
1.39
0.607
0.638
<0.2
4.18
1.34
0.372
1.93
1.39
1.91
2.58
0.760
2.49
51.6
CSA2098.D
P-S3/13-D3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
2.15
1.30
1.37
1.35
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.918
0.349
0.493
0.735
0.436
0.399
<0.4
<0.4
0.426
0.313
3.45
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.282
0.306
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.50
3.07
1.88
1.70
0.875
0.978
0.824
0.873
1.06
0.747
<0.3
1.87
2.72
1.49
0.684
0.450
<0.2
4.64
1.50
0.473
2.20
1.56
2.44
2.85
0.841
2.72
56.2
CSA2099.D
P-S3/13-E1
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
33
67
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.18
0.926
1.03
1.34
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.01
0.220
0.381
0.721
0.412
0.252
<0.4
<0.4
0.240
0.179
2.29
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.211
0.204
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.79
1.61
0.902
0.774
0.449
<0.5
0.413
0.530
0.553
0.516
<0.3
0.886
1.42
0.696
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.33
0.727
0.259
1.10
0.663
0.635
1.46
0.419
1.33
30.1
CSA2100.D
P-S3/13-E2
Sediment
03/31/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
34
66
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.57
1.09
1.34
1.52
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.472
0.285
0.486
0.642
0.474
0.401
<0.4
<0.4
0.334
0.282
3.18
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.272
0.276
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.84
2.40
1.36
1.29
0.785
0.792
0.678
0.631
0.756
0.644
<0.3
1.48
2.22
1.13
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
3.80
1.23
0.337
1.78
1.22
0.879
2.34
0.671
2.17
44.0
CSA2101.D
P-S3/13-E3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
05/01/13
PAH-2012.M
15.2
29
71
1X
Q
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
1.27
0.69
0.723
<0.7
<0.7
<0.1
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
0.601
0.207
0.243
0.417
0.208
0.222
<0.4
<0.4
0.233
0.163
1.63
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.3
0.171
0.174
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
1.84
1.64
0.881
0.816
0.470
0.479
0.487
0.438
0.486
0.431
<0.3
1.03
1.53
0.758
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
2.74
0.864
0.319
1.29
0.861
0.890
1.75
0.492
1.62
Q
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
29.1
I-23
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
CSA2097.D
P-S3/13-D2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
34
66
1X
CSA2098.D
P-S3/13-D3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
CSA2099.D
P-S3/13-E1
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
33
67
1X
CSA2100.D
P-S3/13-E2
Sediment
03/31/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
34
66
1X
CSA2101.D
P-S3/13-E3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
05/01/13
PAH-2012.M
15.2
29
71
1X
I-24
B&B Laboratories
Project J13033
Report 13-3038
Sample Name
Client Name
Matrix
Collection Date
Received Date
Extraction Date
Extraction Batch
Date Acquired
Method
% Dry
% Moisture
Dilution
Target Compounds
CSA2097.D
P-S3/13-D2
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
34
66
1X
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2098.D
P-S3/13-D3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.1
30
70
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2099.D
P-S3/13-E1
Sediment
03/26/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
33
67
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2100.D
P-S3/13-E2
Sediment
03/31/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
04/30/13
PAH-2012.M
15.0
34
66
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
CSA2101.D
P-S3/13-E3
Sediment
03/28/13
04/08/13
04/24/13
ENV 3010
05/01/13
PAH-2012.M
15.2
29
71
1X
Q
Su. Corrected
Conc. (ng/dry g)
Q
Individual Alkyl Isomers and Hopa
1.70
0.70
0.954
0.277
0.308
0.257
0.156
0.052
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.253
0.291
6.98
<0.6
8.09
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
2-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylnaphthalene
1-Methylfluorene
2-Methylanthracene
Retene
Benzo(b)fluorene
C29-Hopane
18a-Oleanane
C30-Hopane
C20-TAS
C21-TAS
C26(20S)-TAS
C26(20R)/C27(20S)-TAS
C28(20S)-TAS
C27(20R)-TAS
C28(20R)-TAS
1.47
0.663
0.821
0.171
0.321
0.258
0.178
0.046
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.297
0.331
8.59
<0.6
12.1
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
1.08
0.436
0.609
0.132
0.218
0.161
0.109
0.052
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.156
0.163
4.67
<0.6
6.64
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
1.27
0.514
0.762
0.204
0.287
0.232
0.149
0.055
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.227
0.280
7.36
<0.6
10.8
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
0.792
0.334
0.427
<0.1
0.152
0.144
0.102
0.028
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
<0.2
0.155
0.175
4.93
<0.6
7.14
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
<0.6
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
J
U
J
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
J
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
Surrogate Recovery
Naphthalene-d8
Acenaphthene-d10
Phenanthrene-d10
Chrysene-d12
Perylene-d12
80
84
84
87
35
67
70
71
77
39
62
65
68
72
26
76
82
81
85
41
70
77
79
85
38
I-25

Tamar Environmental Monitoring Program Tamar Field and Pipeline

Transcription

Similar documents