SAF-RC-051 100 & 300 Area Component. of the ... - Hanford Site

0070470 

SAF-RC-051 

100 & 300 Area Component. of the 

RCBRA -Incremental Soil Sampling 

FINAL DATA PACKAGE 

Z COMPLETE COPY OF DATA PACKAGE TO: p ! 5 f j D 

Jill Thomson HO-23 KW 7/31/06 AUG 0 9 2005 

imAUDATE 

Jackie Queen HO-23 KW 7/31/06 

INMAUDATE 

Jeanette Duncan 119-02 KW 7/31/06 

INMAUDATE 

COMMENTS: 

SDG E2801 SAF-RC-051 

Rad only X Chem only Rad & Chem 

X Complete Partial 

EDMC 

Corrected Bluegrass Report for Soil Plant Toxicity for 

Sample J1ODV4 oind Si0OVVA 

Waste Site: Pit 23 

0

July 20, 2006 

ELR Inc. 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT, ENOINEEMNO, & TECHMCAL SERVICES 

Ms. Joan Kessner 

Subcontract Technical Representa tive 

Washington Closure Hanford LLC 

3070 George Washington Way . 

Richland, WA 99354 

Dear Ms. Kessner. 

0%110 

ACUTE SCREENING BIOASSAYS —AMENDED BLUEGRASS REPORTS 

CONTRACT NUMBER OOOOX-SC-GO553 

Enclosed are amended Bluegrass reports for the following Sample Delive ry Groups: 

/• BG 1542-01 thru 09 - Repo rt amended July 18, 2006 

• BG1542-0 1A, -02A, -03A and -08A and BG1566-01 thru 05 — 

Report amended July 19, 2006 

• BG 1575-01 thru 11— Repo rt amended July 19, 2006 

• BG 1589-01 thru 09 — Repo rt amended July 19, 2006 

An electronic copy of this informa tion is provided for your convenience. 

Should you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (509) 531-8774. 

Sincerely yours, 

0%4^^ 

Emmett L. Richards 

President 

Enclosures 

âôl 

CID L

G rrrbrr yb^ rrrm a r war M w a [pr vrry I To^w^b Tr1 

s bOaY^ ^ a trop q+br ^1t'. ^rerr rr•r p •ar^^ r.w bl • 60S 

4CR erR► Mwir. 

wv^ ^V+pbp 

prnYrr 

"^ rl1••r 

YFb•Cb 

W^ 

b'dM 

Ynbw 

^•0• Mp•Ob 

E^^ WCSM b••My^ YbGbran 

laboralM Contra 

M1542-0 1 J10DW4 

ea 

60 

- 

E 

45.7 - 

s 

41.4 ns 

BG1542-02 J10DV4 64 ns 55.3 ns 

8G1542-03 J10DT8 84 ns - - 

8G1542-04 

BG1542-05 

J10DV2 

J10DV1 

72 

36 

ns 

E 

48.6 ns 

s 

41.8 ns 

BG1542-06 J10DV3 64 ns 47.4 ns 

BG1542-07 J10DV0 76 ns 41.5 ns 

8G1542- 8 Ji0W5 92 ns - - 

BG1542-09 0 J10DT9 11 48 1 E 6 1 37.9 1 ns 

Table 

125 - 63.9 - 12.4 - 113 - 7.87 - 177 - 20.2 

- 40.5 E s 7.30 E s 72.4 ns 327 E s 113 E s 10.6 E s 

- - 762 ns 14.9 ns 123 ns 6.98 ns 199 ns 21.8 ns 

- - 90.9 ns 16.7 ns 172 ns 10.0 ns 263 ns 26.7 ns 

122 

91.3 

108 

80.9 

ns 

Es 

ns 

E 

58.5 

30.8 

60.4 

ns 

Es 

ns 

10.7 

6.70 

8.92 

ns 

Es 

ns 

101 

41.0 

64.5 

ns 

Es 

ns 

6.59 

3.33 

5.13 

ns 

Es 

ns 

160 

71.8 

145 

ns 

Es 

ns 

17.3 

10.0 

14.0 

ns 

Es 

ns 

s 

- 

85.2 

- 

E 

76.9 

78.3 

ns 

ns 

14.7 

11.0 

ns 

ns 

124 

127 

ns 

ns 

9.10 

5.37 1 

ns 

ru 

201 

206 

ns 

ns 

23.8 

16.3 

ns 

ns 

s 

51.0 ns 8.68 ns 90.7 ns 5.06 ns 142 ns 13.7 1 ns

BIOASSAY REPORT 

CHRONIC SCREENING BIOASSAYS 

Conducted January 25 through March 3, 2006 

Report Amended July 18, 2006 

Prepared for 

ELR CONSULTING, INC. 

WASHINGTON CLOSURE HANFORD 

Prepared by 

CH2M HILL 

2300 NW Walnut Boulevard 

Corvallis, Oregon 97330 

July 19, 7006 

Lab I.D. Nos. B1542-01 thru 09 

SDG Number BG1542 

—1—

CONTENTS 

Secdon 

Page 

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 3 

METHODSAND MATERIALS ........................................................................................_... 3 

TESTMETHODS ........................................................................................................ 3 

TESTORGANISMS .................. _............................................................................... 3 

CONTROLSOIL ..........:............................................................................................... 3 

HYDRATIONWATER .............................................................................................. 3 

TESTCONCENTRATIONS ....................................................................................... 3 

SAMPLECOLLECTION ................................................................................._......... 4 

SAMPLECROSS-REFERENCE TABLE .................................................................. 4 

SAMPLEPREPARATION ............ .. ................................................................ _......... 4 

TESTINITIATION ...................................................................................................... 5 

TESTMONITORING ................................................................................................. 5 

TESTTERMINATION ............................................................................................... 5 

DATAANALYSIS ..........................................................................................._......... 6 

RESULTSAND DISCUSSION .............................................................................................. 8 

CHRONICRESULTS ....... . ........................................................................................ 8 

CERTIFICATIONSTATEMENT ............................................................................. 10 

APPENDIX A. RAW DATA SHEETS 

APPENDIX B. CHAIN OF CUSTODY 

—2—

INTRODUCTION 

CH2M HILL conducted chronic screening bioassay tests using the Sandberg bluegrass (Poa 

sandbergir) on soil samples provided by the ELR Consulting for Washington Closure 

Hanford, Richland, Washington. The tests were conducted from January 25 through Match 

3, 2006. 

The statistical analysis presented in the original report (March 28, 2006) were recalculated for 

shoot height and root length. This document serves as an amended to the original report 

TEST METHODS 

METHODS AND MATERIALS 

The chronic test methods were performed according to: Standard Guide for Conducting 

Terrestrial Plant Toxicity Tests, ASTM E 1963-02 (2002). 

TEST ORGANISMS 

The seeds used were obtained from Native Grass Seeds, Comville, Arizona. All test 

conditions were maintained during planting, germination, and growth phases of the test as 

prescribed by the ASTM protocol. 

CONTROL SOIL 

The control soil used in the tests was artificial soil comprised of 70 grade silica sand (70 

percent by weight), kaolin clay (20 percent), and peat moss (10 percent). Calcium carbonate 

(0.4 percent of total weight) was added to adjust soil pH to 7.0t 0.5. 

HYDRATION WATER 

The water used to initially hydrate the control and test soils was Milli-Q equivalent deionized 

water. After initial hydration, all test chambers were watered with half strength 

Hoagland's solution on an every other day basis. All hydration was accomplished via sub 

irrigation. 

TESL' CONCENTRATIONS 

The concentration tested in the bluegrass tests was 100 percent test soil with control soil 

alone for the lab control. For the bluegrass tests, 50 seeds per concentration were used with 

five replicate test chambers per concentration and 10 seeds planted per chamber. Following 

germination, test chambers were thinned to a maximum five seedlings per replicate. 

—3—

SAMPLE COLLECTION 

Individual soil samples used during the testing were collected between October 31, 2005, and 

December 6, 2005. The samples were stored in the dark at 4°C until the initiation of the 

initiation of the tests. Chain of Custody for sample collection is provided in Appendix C. 

SAMPLE CROSS-REFERENCE TABLE 

Table 1 provides a cross-reference of the Client ID numbers, sampling dates, sampling 

locations, Bluegrass test sample identification (SDG) numbers, and Analytical Lab SDG 

numbers. 

Client ID Sample 

Date 

Table 1 

Sample Cross-Reference 

Sample 

Location 

Bluegrass 

test SDG 

Analytical 

Lab SDG 

J10DW4 10/31/2005 600-131 BG1542-01 E2748 

JIODV4 1110812005 PIT 23 BG1542-02 E2801 

JlODT8 11/14/2005 Upland Backfrll Elevated-100-F-2 BG1542-03 E2831 

J10DV2 11/15/2005 Upland Native Reference-Central 

Plateau 

BG1542-04 E2846 

JI0DV1 11/15/2005 Upland BackfrllLow-116-DR-1&2 BG1542-05 E2847 

110DV3 11/16/2005 Upland Native Elevated-JA Jones BG1542-06 E2857 

J10DV0 11/212005 Riparian Elevated-Site #3 

Upriver 100-D 

J10L15 11282005 Riparin Low-Site #10 

Downriver 100-D 

J10D19 12106/2005 Riparian Reference-Site #13 

Vemita Brid 

SAMPLE PREPARATION 

BG1542-07 E2877 

BG1542-08 E2897 

BG1542-09 E2953 

Test soils and control soil were dried and homogenized prior to use. For each replicate, 90 

grams dry weight of soil was added to each test chamber. The soils were initially hydrated 

with Milli-Q equivalent de-ionized water via sub irrigation. In addition, a sub sample of the 

soil was added to a surrogate chamber and hydrated for pH measurements. 

—4—

TEST INITIATION 

Tests were initiated by planting 10 seeds in each test chamber. Seeds were planted at a depth 

of 1 !4 times the seeds diameter (approximately 2 millimeters) and covered gently with soil. 

A small amount of hydration water (10 ml) was sprayed onto the soil surface to ensure seeds 

received moisture. 

TEST MONITORING 

According to information provided by Native Grass Seed (seed supplier), germination should 

take place between 14 and 28 days. The number of seeds in each test chamber that had 

germinated was recorded on days 12, 14, 16, 21, and 23. Germination was determined to 

have occurred on day 23. 

Observations of the shoot appearance were recorded 7 days after germination (30 days after 

planting). The number of germinated seeds in each test chamber was also recorded. 

Chambers that had more than five germinated seeds had shoots removed to prevent 

overcrowding. These test chambers were thinned to five seedlings each. 

Soil pH was taken at test initiation and termination by placing a subsample of soil into a 

specimen cup, adding hydration water, and mixing prior to the pH measurement. 

TEST TERMINATION 

Tests were terminated 14 days post germination. The number of seedlings, shoot appearance 

and height (tallest shoot of each plant), and root appearance and length (longest recovered 

root of each plant) was recorded. 

For each test chamber, all of the above ground biomass (i e. shoots) from all germinated 

plants were combined and placed into tarred aluminum tins. The shoots were weighed to 

determine the wet weight immediately following removal from the test chamber. The shoots 

were then dried in an oven at 60 °C for a minimum of 24 hours. The shoots were then placed 

into a desiccator for a minimum of 2 hours and weighed to determine dry weight. 

The wet and dry weight for the toots were obtained following the same procedure as 

described above. 

—5—

DATA ANALYSIS 

For each test chamber, the following endpoints were calculated: 

• 14 Day Post-Germination Survival (%) 

(Calculated as the number of seedlings alive at 14 day post germination divided by 

5) 

• Average Above Ground Shoot Mass (Wet) 

(Calculated as the total wet weight of the shoots divided by the number of 

seedlings harvested) 

• Average Above Ground Shoot Mass (Dry) 

(Calculated as the total dry weight of the shoots divided by the number of 


• Average Root Mass (Wet) 

(Calculated as the total wet weight of the roots divided by the number of seedlings 

harvested) 

• Average Root Mass (Dry) 

(Calculated as the total dry weight of the mots divided by the number of seedlings 

harvested) 

• Average Total Mass (Wet) 

(Calculated as the total combined wet weights of the shoots and roots divided by 

the number of seedlings harvested) 

• Average Total Mass (Dry) 

(Calculated as the total combined dry weights of the shoots and mots divided by 


• Average Shoot Height 

(Calculated as the total combined height of the tallest shoot of each seedling 

divided by the number of seedlings harvested) 

• Average Root Length 

(Calculated as the total combined length of the longest root of each seedling 


Note: Due to a laboratory error, the Shoot Height for samples J10DT8 and J10LJ5, was 

measured only for the single tallest shoot in each replicate. Similarly, the Root Length for 

samples J10DW4, J1bDV4, J10DT8, and J10LJ5, was measured only for the single longest 

root from each replicate. As a result, statistical analysis for these endpoints on these 

samples was not performed. 

—6—

Statistical analysis for each endpoint listed comprised of entering the data obtained from each 

replicate chamber of a test soil and comparing the results to the data from the replicate 

chambers of the laboratory control. Comparisons were made as a single tailed t-test, 

evaluating for statistically significant reductions from the control value, using CETIS version 

1.1.2. The Equal Variance t Two-Sample test was used. When the assumptions of equality 

of variance or normality necessary for Equal Variance t Two-Sample test was not met, the 

Unequal Variance t Two-Sample test or Wilcoxon Rank Sum Two Sample test was used. 

The endpoint data and the results statistical analysis are summarized in Table 2 below. The 

data represents the average value of the replicate chambers used in each test concentration. 

—7—

RESULTS AND 

Table 2 summarizes the results of the bluegrass tests. 

The results for sample J10DW4 indicated a statistically significant reduction in germination, 

average above ground shoot mass (wet), average above ground shoot mass (dry), average root 

mass (dry), average total mass (shoots + roots wet), and average total mass (shoots + roots 

dry) when compared to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample JIODVI indicated a statistically significant reduction in germination, 

average root length, average above ground shoot mass (wet), average above ground shoot 

mass (dry), average root mass (wet), average root mass (dry), average total mass (shoots + 

roots wet), and average total mass (shoots + roots dry) when compared to the laboratory 

control. 

The results for sample J10DVO indicated a statistically significant reduction in average root 

length when compared to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample J10DT9 indicated a statistically significant reduction in germination 

and average root length when compared to the laboratory control. 

—8—

q.^ nnn ^ n ^^^ 

q•W n I! U, nnn 2 

|^ 

q 

f |! 

b2§ n §2fa n 9 

.w n ! n w1 s 1 

5q|;5|S!!! 

nnnn ^^ n ê 

Il 

!! ; n B»•;a§B2 

$q •w n eew n ,!! 

! 

^ 

f 

^q 

§§ 

•^ n g2^ n a n , 

;§2;;;&R;2 

i ...., w 2M.w 

l ij 1 2 2122 n 2 . 0 

| 

- 

--- 

§;§'|;v; ' r 

|i q 'w2 n , to ..l= 

^ ^ | 

^^ ^ | 

sa;=:„ n ;, 

Kkk§)§k2k 

^^ | | ^§22§2^2$ 

I^ !imam n °^§^; 

-g-

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT 

I certify that this data package is in compliance with the Statement of Work, both technically 

and for completeness, for other than the conditions detailed above. Release of the data 

contained in this hard copy data package has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or a 

designee, as verified by the bollowipg 

—10—

APPENDIX A 

RAW DATA SHEETS 

-11-

BWfGRASS GROWTH TUT 

n,.er..1.eRAl.a TWsrn Oft OMAN a,, 

sw.1e oeeôqu 1.1? o.T U ?1` evuôns'ônl(^_ 

' ^p►•t3T b^^ 

Ssmold IO: lie CadN 70 Wade Mks Send 2e% 10% 

• 0se"wis nelsd *A46 ell 

cow_ REPLICATE 

WI!•Fl1FMG010E 091plGEC! 

M a^ 

PoST• ?A VSPMT. 

OlAG , e+ce 

(I COp ser 

11 a ewkot)d 

NdMYS MST. 

amMAGVCe 

e.M.Ir 

A 3 S S S 

caua e 1 3 1 fo 7o y' S 

TOe,.f..li.rrp..e 

^Mb A ,3 

R.Cb.r e 

pw a c 

mclaro 

Rqure __ 

P^p A — 

R.pbel.^ 

Rra.e 

Rwkwo 

R.p1er n 

rn..e S^ lr,ae: 

losow DWA4 

11r..e S, w.vc 

t+.+w.4 

o..sr.a^ 

R.FÂ 

aok e 

Rwwc 

A., -0 

Mawr[ 

lw,.md 

Mr uA wo ght 

ew.Rme 

o 1 1 q 1 ,4 1 3 

a 'Z 1 a 1 3 1-11:s 1 3 

v.wa 

gala 

(O Vr.e'q) 

' >;3•ob 

MAL 

Re eeleee. 

1wow, er a.wreeo.aq prw er ers.ol 000ars¢ o..Ok.ok.l 4e..o.Q^ 2• 

w 1 2 

1 

b 

a. • d 

Te 

(n,l/i^ I•M 

a 

1 

w I hl^ 

o eA. rea.,o.r.as 

e rr 

. i Z LNY•— ^ [N^•J' — n> Cyv.,h 

.Q?nn 

1a rZ^ - - 

^,h co..wr (,oa `lye. /rw 

„I 2m Y S .a sn 

A .., r4 na (. X13... 

o L4z .4S ... 3q •ft ,..^ u ^. 

c SK ^ ^ T3.. 4 ... 

e ... 4 11 .. 1 V,. 

Tr T.e wt w.lwl wt 

A I CAIN (NrJ 1329 q 

e 26^• 

e 

1353.0 

0 tpnq. 12zk.Z 031 o 

e 1 1 %1 t4 3. A( 

los a s , sw 

A IK2i • .. 1 r .. zf5r, 

e l 8 .. 143 / TS .. (SO .. 

e Ira ,., ,.SS 13 ,.. 

o Is .. r .w 7a ... n. 

-78 ICS-9. 

TrTwwl wren o wl 

A I-zV4. OS 

e I 1TilA 101 

a Innr 7 X6.2 L! 

o 151.t ^t4L 

f Z ( 2 . 

. 

u, l3, N, 

a , l3 1P 'J, 11,-t 

13,J, 3 

12,lS, tl^ 2 

-12-

TO.p. Pw+dn.n 

A 

hpbrt 

0 

Pp MD 

P.pluk e 

"0" P.nNwlpllal 

P.p.0 .A 

P.O s 

Pqk c 

P.prw.D 

R.ppoP n ^. 

Mw.w S+ W 

D\m"Wq 

BLUEGRASS DaamH TEST 

C a P.l\I\ nqw Tr SM DPC 0144200 

`+rs DnDoauôawQa +..NLarxtôn jj .TT 

@ 

Comm Pxpa (lx IH ^m l^ 

100% 

REPLICATE. 

PWMW 

e 3 q 

c O 3 

D' 

! N 

D.wO. Ml.d pROl.11ee . 

t!. E2T4solaw ig I,SNL 

sseeftwrkaw I..,1.TL 

rns T8Avs POSE. I ATs POST. _ 

AH' 

1 Nil& ^D pa ftod 

3 11 3 1 1 3 

Ik.AI\eP.ol wMp! TF T.nvll TM1IN1 Wl 

D\.•.a\âq A 0 1{ 9 

e Z. b 

2 tob. 00.1 

D. mw 

A.o.ukA 

IbppPl.s 

P.pk"C 

P.pk\l.o 

Pppkak E 

c o .1 •231. 1foll. 

^ P^ 

M.r.pn AOM lwp.\ lvs. Zb > ONE Mi.NLV 

0."Y.P pK! A 1W J . nul lM 

p1^w\P.rA W.11! 

OPD.P P.D 

e 0 CD ,., D. 

c .. .. 

P I o Ivn Ir. nun nw, 

PAPê Mr) An .A ,en TR All 

- 3zn=, MEM",'^^ 

Iêlrl^^5i^tl\Lib7 n 

1^ 

^^ p.\ ^ 

1iQ^ 

^ ^^ ^^ 

^l4iQ:I n 

^^ 

-13-

CETIS Test Summary 

Pape 1 of 3 

Report Date: 18 Ju1-08129 PM 

Test link 07-4737.3144/8154201p$B 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH2M Hill 

Test No: 03-0378.5225 Test Type: PlantChronlc Duration: WA 

Start Date: 25Jan•06 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Species: Poa sMKft g9 

Ending Date: DII Water. Source: 

Setup Date: 25 Jan-M orins: 

Comments: recalculated Height and Length data July 18. 2008 

Sample No: 18-1426-8954 Code: 81542-01 Client: 

Sample Date. 31 Oct-05 Mater4l: Sod Project: 

Receive Dab: Source. Hanford 

Sample Age: 86d Oh Station: 

Comments: J10DW4, E274801 

Comparison Summary 

Analysis Endpoint NOFIL LOEL ChV PM3D Method 

04.6686.9248 %Germination 100 WA 18.50% Equal Variance U o•Sampls 

10-5567-7574 Average AG Wt (Wet. mg) 4100 100 WA 27.27% Equal Variance I; Two-Sample 

194244.1707 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 4100 100 WA 3824% Equal Variance tTwoSample 

02-5160-3380 Average Root Wt. (Wet mg 100 > 100 WA 41A2% Equal Variance tTwoSampie 

06.27742762 Average Rod WL (Dry, mg) 4100 100 WA 45.60% Equal Variance ! Two-Sample 

14.6818.7289 Average Total Wt (Wet Mg 4100 100 WA 33.72% Equal Variance It TwoSampN 

13.2852-1747 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 4100 100 WA 40.05% Equal Variance t7Wo-Sample 

000-092-1014 CEnSw v1.1.2revl Analyst_,!r— Approval: 

-14-


% Germination Summary 

Conn/6 Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 0.88000 0.60000 1.00000 0.08000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.80000 OA0000 0.80000 0.08944 020000 33.33% 

Average Reigtrt (mm) Summary 

Conc.*/. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 41.390 33.5 4625 22538 3.0396 12.18% 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Summary ' . 

Cone-A ControlTyps Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SoWS 5 63.903 41.473 82,338 7.1313 15.946 24.95% 

100 5 40.525 19.54 55A57 6.0773 13589 33.53% 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Summary 

Conn% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 ArtlWal SOOTS 5 12.351 7.9275 19.276 21347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 72993 3.675 10.837 1.3763 3.0775 4216% 

Average Root Wt (Wei, mg) Summary 

Conc.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOOTS 5 11323 51.638 15&52 21.449 47.962 42.36% 

100 5 72356 40.920 111.72 13.274 29.681 411)2% 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Summary 

Conc-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 7.8866 3.78 14.108 1.8638 4.1678 5298% 

100 5 3.265 2015 4.6500 0.4968 1.1108 33.99% 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 


0 Artificial SOWS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 261)88 58.331 32.93% 

100 5 112.88 60A8 167.17 18.747 41.919 37.14% 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Summary 


0 Artificial SOWS 5 20.217 12.223 33.384 3.9407 11,8117 43.58% 

100 5 10.567 6.02 15287 1.8513 4.1395 39.17% 

Pags 2 01 3 

Report Date: 18 JuWG M PM 

Test Link: 07-4737-3144/8154201ps8 

• -15- 

000-092.701-1 CMSm v1.12tev1 Analys eApproval:


% Germination Detail 

Cone=/. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 AMAcial SOWS 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.80000 0.80000 

100 O.60000 0.40000 OA0000 0.80000 0.80000 

Average Height (mm)Deta9 

Conc e4 Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 50.8 0 41.8 v 55.8 30.7000 3 43.5 J 

100 43.7000 393 33.5 44 4625 

Avenge AG Wt (Wet, mg) Detail 

Cone=/6Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 672900 55.1900 82.338 732233 41.4750 

100 55.4567 19.54 38.2900 40.4250 48.9125 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) Detail 

Conc-Y. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Artificial SoiVS 151720 10.552 19.276 8.82888 7.92751 

100 10.6366 3.87499 523001 6.6876 102875 

Average Root Wt. (Wet, mill Detail 

Cone!/. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArtkWal SOWS 143.362 140.624 158.524 72.0233 31.6375 

100 111.717 40.9200 44.38 83.545 81.2175 

Avenge Root WL (Dry, mg) Detail 

Cone-0L Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Art Wal SOWS 8.75601 8.39399 14.108 3.77999 4.295 

100 4.65000 2.34500 2.01498 328499 4.045 

Average Total Wt (Wet,rp)Detail 

Cone-SS Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 

0 Artificial SOWS 210.652 195.814 240.862 145.247 911125 

100 167.173 6OA6 82.6700 123.97 130.130 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mg) Detall 

Conn'/. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Anificlaf SoIVS 23.9280 18.840 33.384 12.6088 122225 

100 152868 6.01999 7.245 9.95248 14.3325 

Page 3 of 3 

Report Date: 18 304081:29 PM 

Test Link: 07.4737-3144113154201nsa 

000-092-101 .1 CETISTM v1.12revl Analyst 5+ Approval• 

-16-

CETIS Analysis Detail 

Comparisons: Page 1 of 8 

Report Date: 18 JuWS 1:29 PM 

Analysis: 04.6686.924818154201psB 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Un it 

Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

%Germina tion Comparison 07.4737.3144 07.4737-3 144 18Jul-081:28PM CETISv1.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOM Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Va riance t TwoSampla C a T Angular (Correebd)


Comparisons: Page 2of a 

Report Date: 18 JUI-06129 PM 

Analysis: 03.46984423B154201ps8 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH2M H01 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Llnk Control Link Dab Analysed Version 

Average Height (mm) Compa rison 07.4737-3144 074737.3144 18 JuM 128 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zefa 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Un its ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C > T UnVensformed 11100 >100 1 NA 16.50% 

Group Comparisons 

Cont rol ve Cone-% Sta ti stic 

critical 

P Value tlSO Decision(0.05) 

Artificial So81Sed 100 1.05828 1.85968 0.16% 7.53817 NwrSkOfi ant FJfect 

ANOVATabI• 

Sou rce Sum of Squares Mean Squa re DF F Statistic Is-Value Dectsion(0.0 

Between 46.01024 48.01024 1 1.12 0.32083 Non.SignBkent Effect 

Error 326.66 41.0825 8 

Total 374.670212 87.092735 9 

ANOVA Assumptions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value D•cision(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ra tio F 223510 23.15450 0.45515 Equal Variances 

Dlsbbu ilon Shapiro-Wilk W 0.96425 013308 Normal DistribuUon 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cono-Ye Cont rol Type Cou nt Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum M-Amurn SO 

0 AAiBdal SoiVS 5 45.68 38.7 65.8 7.6344 

100 5 41.390 33.5 4025 5.0398 

Graphics 

1 U 1 

1 i 

C 

nY 1 3 

!! 

pp 

1 

p 

31 

1r f ^1 • 

p 

1• t 

n 

i 

1 

^ 

a ----- -----i1-------- 

---- -- 

S •r 

0 

• 1 11 

• 

1 

^ 

• 1 

1 

e 300 - 40 •13 -IA 45 as 03 1D 1; >-0 

c=C1% Rants 

000-092-101-1 CETISw v1.1.2rev1a„ 

Analyst Approval: 

1 

l 8 _


Comparisons: Page 3 o 8 

Report Date: 18 J1406129 PM 

Ana4sis: 10-5567-757418154201pS6 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average AG WI (Wet, mg) Comparison 074737.3144 074737-3144 18Jul-06128PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C> T Untranskrmed


Plant Bioassay- Chronic 

Comparisons: I 

Page40f 

8 

Report Dale: 18 JuI-W 129 PM 

Anslysis: 19-4244-170718154201 ps8 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG WI (Dry. mg) Comparison -074737-3144 07.4737-3144 18 Jul-081:28 PM CETISA.12 

Method Alt H Date Transform Zeb NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance lTwo-Sample C> T Untransksmed 7100 100 WA 3824% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dedslon(0.05) 

Artificial SNUSedl 100 1.98888 1.85955 0.0410 4.72307 Significant Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic Is-Value Dedsion(0.08) 

Between 63.79421 63.79421 1 3.96 0.08192 Non-Significant Effect 

Error 129.0223 16.12778 8 

Total 192.816475 79.921995 9 

AWWAAssumptions 

Attribute Test Statl•llo Critical P Vsiue Declslon(0.01 

Variances Vartance Ratio F 2.40572 23.15450 0.41603 Equal Vartanas 

Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 091144 0.29103 Normal Distribullon 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Dab 

Conc-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial $OHM 5 12351 79273 19.276 4.7733 

110 5 7.2993 3.675 10.637 30775 

< er 

Graptdcs 1 r 

g t 

i 

r 

r 

Z. 

r1 

ii• 

r 

• r • r 

r 

r 

C 1 

8 1 

8 i 

< 

1 

1 

o 

a lm -ac- -u •lp s.s to c-3 to u u 

coao-!s RMkw 

000-092-101-1 CE71S"I0.12reA Analyst Approval: 

• 

CH2 1111 Hill 

-20-


Comparisons: Pageaof 8 

Report Date: 18 J" 129 PM 

Analysis: 02-5160.3380/8154201 psB 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic CH2M 19il 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Llnk Oats Analyzed Version 

Average Root WL (Wet, m0) Comparison 074737-3144 074.7373144 18 Jut-GS 129 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LJOEL Toxictlnks ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two,%woe C>T Unsarxdormed 11100 mo 1 . WA 41.42% 


Control vs Cono-% Statistic Critical P-Vakm MSD Dedsion(0.05) 

Artificial SOWSedl 100 _ 1.620S9 1.85955 0.0719 44908 . No1FS;rAcant Effect 

ANOVATable . 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa re DP F Statistic P-Value Deeislon(0.05) 


E rr or 12725.4 1590.675 8 

Total 16902.9961 5768.2716 9 

ANOVAAssumptons 

Attribute Test 8tattstt4 Critical P-Val•• D•cislonmoll) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.61121 23.15450 0.37516 Equal Variances 

Dlstribu8on ShWkaWMc W 0.91518 0.31837 Normal Dlsbibullorl 


Cone% Control Type Count Mean Minimal) Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SoIVS S 113.23 51.638 158.52 .47.962 

100 5 72.358 40.920 111.72 29.681 

Graphics 

a r 

t 1 

1 i • 

1 

3 r 

n 

r 

• • 1 

0 r 

0 100 .tp .l,e -is 43 0.0 45 1.0 1:9 1.0 

Co1xr'h nanlda 

000-092-001-1 cEIS"'v1.13cw1 Analyses_ ApprovaC 

r 

r 

r 

n 

-21-

MIS Analysis Detail 


Report Date: 18 JuW6129 PM 

Anatysls: 062774.276V B754201 ps6 

Plant Bioassay - C hronic CH2E1 H81 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root WL (Dry, mg) Compedaon 07.47374144 07.4737-3 144 18 Jul-081:29 PM CEf1Sv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Tox ic Un its Chif PMSD 

Equal Va ri 

ance t Two-Sample C>T UnlranskKmeO 114100 1D0 WA 45.809E 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Cri ti 

cal P-Value MSD Decialon(0.05) 

Artificial WSed1 100 238399 1.85955 O=1 3.88897 Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Square* Mean SquareDF F Statistic P-Value Decleion(0.05) 

Between 52.85754 52.86784 1 5.68 0.04427 Significant Effect 

FJror 74AIe$7 9.3021 Dg 8 

Total 12728471 82.189949 9 

ANOVA Assump tions 

Att ribute Test Statislle Critical P-Valu e, D•dslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 14.07658 23.15450 0.02523 Equal Va riances 

Dlsbftllon Shapiro-Wilk W 0.91314 0.30324 Normal Distribu tion 

Da ta 

Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone-Y• Control Type Cou nt Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar tificial SdyS 5 7.8688 3.78 14.108 4.1678 

1D0 5 3288 2.015 4.6500 1.1108 

Graph ic s 

^ a 

^. a 

LD i 

J N 1 

3 $ i 

4 

1 • 

1 

I 

1 

1 

_____________ ______________ 

0.f IJI i • • 

a 

o 

I 

• I 

1 

1 

e61 

4s 

• 1 1 

1 

o loo -so -ts •to as an us w u zo 

Cam 

000-092-101.1 censS v1.12reb Analyst ^ Approval: 

-22-


Comparisons: Page7of 8 

Report Date: 11 8 Jul-W 1.29 PM 

Anelysls: 14-6818.728918154201 ps8 

Plant Sloassay • Chronic CHUM Hill 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sample Llnk Control Link Dab Analyzed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Compa ri son 07.47373144 074737-3144 18 JulM II29 PM CETIS0.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Tox ic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Va riance t Two-Sample C > T Unbanctamed


Comparisons: Pape 8 of 8 

Report Data: lei" 129 PM 

Analysis: 13.2652-174718154201 ps8 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH211 Hill 

Endpoint Anal;: Typo Sample Un it Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 07.47373144 07.4737-3144 18 Jul-06129 PM CETISA.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Untie ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C a T Unlran310nned 4100 100 NIA 40.059E 


Control vs Conc-Y. Statistic Critical P Value MSD Deeislon(0.05) 

Artificial SoIVSedl 100 2.21643 1.85955 0.0288 8.09629 Significant Effect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P Valve DaeblonM.05) 


Error 3711292 4729118 8 

Total 611.940475 260.20242 9 

AHOVAAssumptlons 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Deetaion(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 4.83128 23.15450 0.17247 Equal Vadances 

Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.93905 0.54254 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Data - Transformed Data 

Cone.% Contr ol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 20.217 12.223 33.384 &8117 

IDD 5 10567 6.02 15.287 4,1395 

Graphics 

0 

1 r' 

B 0. 1 0 ............. z 

r 

< i 

• r 

rrr 

0 t 

• • r 

0 100 ,tA -1.5 -la -05 0.0 OS IA LS ZA 

cone-% Rankles 

-24- 

004092-101-1 CETISM %1.12revt Analyst Approval:_

7*" oodiu 

PAP uNA 

R.0=0 e 

R.oc*c 

%Pkmo 

ftpp e 

.wwnalr went 

(990 woo* 

p.o E w.4w 

(. SMl.a 

6MGRA41 GROWTH 793T 

Wpo.e ON o--l= oq t2-OT—Dlp4 '! opr 14-Lr—lr opr7 1 -a-- * owp n 

• 

colt aEStlrATC 


0yP '7a= w'00L n. 0rm^m mmm-e9 

1.^Ê3î',^l^^FÎ^^L*i•3R' 

I !ImKIî!mR.Smv 

SM-P-M Ip 

n 

^.pem - 

MUfM 

SaftwW10'. E1e01o1SOtZ 6U"ll2- 07- 

A 

a 

pie 

tuaw.w 

r.oa 

2- 

e"a *P-kow 

:orl.s,c 

or 

PM. r•oiWro voen 

elpdm" eueroerA 

Ww.,y row. dVAd 

al cl 

J t 

3 2 

3 

t4Mrs POSr• 

a Mewce 

wa..w 

r..m 

s- 

3 

o -^. 

e 3 1 j 

444* p.pd+n..e. o.aw dapl pppp..NSt 

N.pt.,KSA ' 

R^pc.p e "y 

ap.o,.o 

000aplpappppn.a 

II.ppJ' p A 

PAP l e 

R.pwue _ 

PA a 0 

R.ok.. e 

ho.d me 

ob a Hodv colt 

Nwd.o 

7M"Rm 7cspm TMEMMMINt!R'"R!^ 

K^ vl ^ n 

^p ^pl.67a q^' ^^êeê^'^ n T^ 

• p ne2•79c^rnyrfm 

LV 9 KAMI ff M-3 a . e F i 

^[Û^7 

a+ 

eeNL pt p^p 

p 

a owwd 

A 

77. ( 

-7A 

m 0 LF-M m M • 

4 

-25- 

J 

0 

0

MIS Test Summa ry 


Report Date: 18 Jul-08 2:17 PM 

Teat Unk: 16-8965.72148154202paB 

Plant eloassay-Chronic CH2M Nib 

Test No: 16.7149.5301 Tedlype: PlanlChronlc Duration: WA 

Start Date: 25 Jan 4)8 Protocol: ASTM E19M2 (2002) Spades: Port send" 

Ending Date: DO Wale: Source: 

Setup Date: 25 Jan-08 Brine: 

Continents: recalculated Height and Length data July 18, 2008 


Sample Date: 08 Nov-05 Material: Sol p ro ject 

Receive Date: Source: Hankrd 


Comments: J10DV4, J10DV5, J10DV8, J10DV7, J10OV8. 

E280101 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL ChV PMSD Mathod 

09.8154.0700 %Germination 100 >100 WA 37.51% Equal Va riance It TwoSample 

06,20168600 Average Height (mm) 100 > 100 WA 35.14% Equal Variance It TwoSampie 

0255980334 Average AG Wt (Wet, M) 100 ;-1100 WA 49.90% Equal Variance It Two-Sample 

1404947651 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 100 >100 WA 59.46% Equal Variance It TwoSampis 

1051175.1041 Average Root WL (Wet mg 100 > 100 WA 55.35% Equal Va ri ance ITwoSanple 

07-02645708 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 62A3% Equal Va riance It Two-Sampla 

061145.5351 Average Total Wt (Wet mg 100 > 100 WA 51.32% Equal Variance It TwoSarrplo 

067364-0671 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 59.60% Equal Variance tTwoSanple 

000-092-101-1 CETISnr v1.1.2rev1 Analyst B^ AWFOV81• 

-26-


%Germination Summary 

Cono•Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minknum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 0.64000 020000 1.00000 0.18000 0.357/7 55.90% 

Average Height (mm) Summary 

Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SoilS 5 45.68 38.700 55.8 3.3895 7.5344 16.49% 

100 5 553 2&700 78 7.9481 17.772 3214% 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 

Cones /6Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOBS 5 63.903 41.475 82338 7.1313 15.946 24.95% 

100 5 76.157 23.653 115.05 15.5% 34.870 45.79% 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) Summary 

Cones% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artifidal SOILS S 12.351 7.9275 19.278 21347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 14.852 4.1033 24.8 3.3228 7.4301 50.03% 

Average Root WR (Wet, mg) Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 113.23. 51.838 151152 21A49 47.962 4236% 

100 5 12276 4&4 20231 25.995 5&128 47.35% 

Average Root Wd (Dry, mg) Summary 


0 Ar58dal SoiVS 5 7.8668 3.78 14.108 1.8639 4.1578 52.98% 

100 5 6.9781 2.3667 13.37 1.8708 4.1833 59.95% 

Average Total Wt (INK mg) Summary 

Cone -% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 26.088 58.331 3293% 

100 5 19&92 70.053 317.38 41.348 92.456 46.48% 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone-PA Control ype Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 20.217 12723 33.384 3.9407 8.8117 43.58% 

100 5 21.830 6A7 3&17 5.1432 11.500 5268% 


Report Date: 18 Jul-w 217 PM 

TestUnk: 16.19 721416154202ps8 

000-092-101.1 CETIS" v1.1.2reN Analyst A- Approval: 

-27-


% Gemination Detall - 

Cone-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Artitldal SONS 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 0.80000 

100 1.000110 O.ti0000 020OW 1.00000 0.40000 

Average Height (mm) D" 

Conn% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 ArtiflOW SONS 50.8 41.8 55.8_ 36.7000 43.5 

100 562000 28.7000 61 Ste 78 

Average AG Wt (We%mg) Dotal[ 

Cone=ti Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SONS 672900 55.1900 82.338 732233 41A750 

100 90.872 23.6533 113.05 81985 89.34 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Det ll 


0 Arodal SONS 155720 10-552 - 19278 892886 7.92751 

100 18.948 4.10333 24.8 13A640 - 14.9450 

Avenge Rod WL (Wet, mg) Detail 


0 Ar88dal SONS 143.362 140.624 158524 7=233 51.6375 

100 130.632 46.4 202.31 W-416 142065 

Average Rod WL (Dry. mg) Detaif . 


0 Artificial SONS 8.75601 8.39399 14.108 3.77998 4.295 

100 8.39000 230668 13.37 4.75400 6.01001 

Average Total Wt (Wet. mg) DOW 

Conc-A Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artillciai SONS 210.652 195914 240.862 146.247 93.1125 

100 221.504 70.0533 317.360 154.264 231.405 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Detail 

Conc-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SONS 23.9280 18.945 33.384 126068 122225 

100 25.3380 6.46999 3&17 182180 20.9550 


Report Date: 18JuF08217 PM 

Test Link: 108985.72148154202psB 

000-092.101.1 CEMI v1.1.2roN Analyst:_Approval 

-28-


Plant Bioassay • Chronic 

Comparisons: Paps 1 of 8 

Report Date: 18 J:fr052:17 PM 

Analysis: - 09-8154-070018154202psB 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analyzed ' Version 

% Gemynalion Compsnson 108965.7214 16-8985.7214 18 JUW62:17 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeta NOEL MEL Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Variance lTwo-Sampls C>T Angular (Corrected) 100 >100 1 WA 3751% 


Control vs Cone--A Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dectsion(0.05) 

AruficwSoiVSedl 100 1.30924 1.85955 0.1134 0.37044 NonSfpilficanlEtlect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF 

F Statistic 

P-Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 0.1700585 0.170059 1 1.71 022680 Non-SiOnitkant Effect 

Error 0.7936922 0.099212 a 

Total 0.96375073 02W2700 9 

ANOVAAssumplions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Deolslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 3.65997 23.15450 023677 Equal Variances 


Data Summary Original Dab Transformed Daft 

CH2111 Hill 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO . 

0 Artificial SolUS 3 0.88000 0.60000 1.00000 0.17889 120581 0.86608 1.34528. 020635 

100 5 0.64000 020000 1.00000 0.35777 0.94500 0.48365 1.34528 0.39477 

Graphics 

Le 

i 

0. 0. • • 

0.f 

0.f 

al 

OA 

• • 

0 100 -LO •LS -LO O.S a0 • ai 

Panetta 

LO Ls IA 

C•IIL Sf• 

000-092-101-1 CET1Sw v1.1.2rewl Analyst; Ir Appm+at 

-29-


Comparisons: Page 2of 8 

Report Date. 18 JIW6 2:1T PM 

Analysis: D6.201"600rB164202DsB 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic CH214 Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Dais Analyzed Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 16-0985.7214 164885-7214 18JuFWZ17PM CETISvIA.2 

Method Ail H Data Transform Zeta NOEL IAEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance l Two-Sample C > T UnberWomled 1 DO >100 1 NIA 35.149E 


Control vs Cone,% StatisticCritical P Value MSD Dectsion(0.05) 

Artificial SoOlSedl 100 -1.1144 1.85955 0.8513 16.0531 Non-SIgM6cen1 Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DP F Statistic P-Value Deciston(0.05) 

Between 231.361 231.361 1 124 029748 Nom, g ficant Effect 

Em9r 1490.508 168.3135 8 

Total 1721.86898 411.67451 9 

ANOVAAssumptlons 

Attribute - Test Statistic Critical P Vatue Deelslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Redo F 5.56415 23.15450 0.12511 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiro-Wllk W 0.95255 0.69675 Normal Distribution 

Dab Summary Original Data Trans(onned Data 

Cone.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Noon Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artfidal So1US 5 45.68 30.7 55.8 7.5344 

100 5 55.3 28.7 78 17.772 

Graphics 

1 21 r 

r • 

i r 

i r r 

i 

r 

• 

0 

0 100 -20 -r] -ta - e. CA U to is to 

cone- 'h . IlanMns 

000-M-101-1 CEnsw v1.12revl Analyst 7r- Approval: 

ID 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

-30-


Comparisons: Page3of B 

Report Date: 19 JuW6 2:17 PM 

Analysts: 02-5596.93348154202psB 

Ptah Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpoint Analysts Typs Sample Link Control Unk Data Analysed Version 

Average AG Wt (W eL mg) Compa rison 168985.7214 t8-0985 .7214 18 J" 2:17 PM CETiSv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Un its ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T 1lnharaformed 11100 31100 1 WA 49.90% 

G roup Comparisons - 

Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P-Vaka MSO DaeistorO.0 

Ar tiliclal SoiVSedl100 -0.7148 1.85955 0.7524 31.6871 Non-SIgNBcant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa re OF F Statistic P Value Declalon(o.05) 

Between 375.3645 375.3845 1 0.51 OA9519 Non-SIgN6cant Effect 

Error 5860.917 735.1146 a 

Total 6256.28152 1110.4792 9 


Aftributa Test Statis tic Critical PValue Dedsion(0.01 

Variances Variance Ra tio F 4.78193 23.15450 0.15878 Equal Variances 

DisbibuWn Shapiro-WOCW 0.95704 0.75167 Normal Distribu tion 


Conn% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Afficiai Soi/S 5 63.903 41.475 82.335 15.948 - 

100 5 78.157 23.653 115.05 34.870 

Graphics 

t ^ 

r 1 

E4 

1 

r 1 

1 

t ^• 

1e 

` 

1 

1 

p --_______ -__^ ______________ 

i 

• 1 

1 

• 1 

1 

• 1 

1 

0 1 

0 Ire -1.0 -La -LO -as " " 14 15 L 

Co11P'h awaits 

000092401-1 CETISwvl.12nrA Analyst Approval: —31— 

1



Report Date: 18 J" 2:IT PM 

km ysta: 14.0494.7651lBl54202psS 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type SemplaUnk Comroll-ink Date Anslyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, nV) Comparison 168985.7214 18.8955-7214 18 J" 217 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CDV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Unlransformed 11100 >100 1 WA 59.46% 


Control vs Con=s'. Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Deciabn(0.05) 

Ar tificial SWUM 100 -0.0333 1.85955 0.7279 7.34419 Non-SoA ant Effe ct 

ANOVATable 

Sou rc e Sum of Squares Mean SquareOF F Statistic- P-Value Dacision(0.05) 

Between 15.64047 15.64047 1 OAO 0.54421 Non-SlgrrficantE ffect 

Error 311.963 38.99537 8 

Total 327.603419 54.635837 9 - 


Attribute Test Statis tic Critical P Value Deelsion(0.01) 

Va riances Variance Ra tio F 2.42296 2515450 0.41235 Equal Variances 

DIsb01u0on Shapiro-Wilk W 0.95225 0.97606 Normal Dalribufan 

Data Summ ar y Original Data Transformed Data 

Con-% Control Typo Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial So01S 5 12.351 7.9275 19276 4.7733 

100 5 14.852 4.1033 24.3 7.4301 

Graphics 

i 

1 ' 

1 1 

g1 S. ' 

g 

1 1 • 

1 

o 

------- ------ 

, 

----------- -- 

' 

0 100 • -Le .LS -LO 43 DA 0.51d LS 1.0 

Coati-% aanidb 

000-W2-101-1 C£TISm v1.122et4 AnaW ^= Approval 

, 

, 

, 

, 

, 

-32-


Plant Bloassay. Chronic 

Comparisons: Page 5 of a 

Report Date: 16 JUFOa 217 PM 

Analysis: 105675.1 D41/a 1$4202ps l3 

Endpolnl Analysis Type Sample Un it Co ntrol Unk Data Analyzed Version 

Average RootWL (Weknv) Compaum 165965.7214 165985.7214 1aJuW62:17PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance ITwo-Sample C> T lHmansfamrod 1100 >100 1 WA 55.359E 


Control vs Cone-9E Statistic Critical P-Valve MSD Dsclaton(0.05) 

AnificW Soil/Sod 100 -02828 1.65955 0.5077 52.8695 Non•SIpM6wnt Effect 

ANOVA Table 

SourceSum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 227.0727 227.0727 1 0.05 038452 Non-Significant Effect 

E rr or 22716 2538.5 6 

Total 22943.0755 3056.5732 9 

ANOVA As3umpti0rl9 

Attribute Test Stat istic Critical P-Value Decislon(0.01) 

VarWrres Variance Ratio F 1AN72 23.15450 0.71863 EWW Variances 

Distr ibu tion Shapko-Wik W 0.95710 0.75234 Normal DWOution 


Concs,E Control Type CountMean Minimum Maximum • SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial Sol l/S 5 11323 51.636 158.52• 47.952 

100 S 122.76 46.4 202.31 W26 

Graph ic 

s 

t r 

r 

g, 

r 

r 

s ^ r 

r 

r 

0 

0 100 

CO W% 

.e 

r 

.1.0 elf •1f -0.5 OD Qf lA if 

r 

i 

wrists 

CH2 1111 Hill 

ODD-M-101.1 CETISm v1.12 A An*sC 2'' Approval: —33- 

10


Comparisons: Page aa18 


Ane"Is: 07-0264-010618154202ps0 

Plant etoassey • Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Llr* Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root WL (Dry, mill Comparison 16$985.7214 16$9857214 18 Jul-W 2:17 PM CEnW.1.2 

Method Alt H DateTranisform Zeta NOl1 LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untransfcnned 11100 >100 1 WA 62A3% 


Control vs Cone'.. Statistic Critical P Value MSD Deekion(0.05) 

Ar tificial SowSedl 100 0.33643 1.85955 0.3728 4.91078 NonSIgniftant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squa re s Moan Sq uare OF F Statistic P Vahre Declslon(0.05) 

Between 1.973415 1.973415 1 0.11 0.74520 NonSipNBCant Effect 

Error 130A799 17A3499 8 

Total 141A5= 19.405407 9 

ANOVAAssump0ons 

Allnbut• Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decislon(0.01) 


Distitbutlon Shapiro-Wilk W 0.90289 023448 Normal Disebution 

Data Summa ry Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone=/. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minbnurn Maximum SO 

0 Artificial Solvs S 7.8868 178 14.108 4.1678 

100 5 0.9781 2.3867 1331 4.1833 

Graphics 

r of 

S 

Le i 

03 

sa 

03 

0.4 

i • 

r 

r 

r 

rJ e...._...... ^ . .............. 

•, 

r 

w ^ 

10i 

000492-10t-1 

o 

Co c.% 

too •w •u •w as oa os w u 

aansrts 

CETIS1 l v1.12rev1 An*st:_^r- Approval;__ 

r 

r 

r 

w 

-34-


Comparisons: Pap 7of 8 

Report Date: 18 JuWM 2:17 PM 

Analysts: 06.1145.53511B154202ps8 

Plant Bioassay . Chronic CH2M Nil 

Endpoint Analysis Type SampleLlnk ControlUnk DateAn slyzed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Compa rison 1"985.7214 1"985-7214 18 Jul-08217 PM CETISv1.12 

M ethod Alt H Data Tmnsform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Va ri ance lTwo-Sampls C>T Untranatonne0 1100 )100 1 WA 51.32% 

G roup Comparisons 

Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Valve MSD Deelsion(0.05) 

Ar tificial SoNSedl 100 -0.4458 1.85955 0.6661 90.9112 Non-Sigr ihant Effect 

ANGVATabie 

Source Sun of SquaresMean Square DF F Statistic RVslue Dseision(0.05) 

Between 1186.341 1186.341 1 020 0.66771 Non.Sig nifiantEHect 

Error 47802.41 5975.302 8 

Total 48988.7550 7181.8427 9 

AHOVAAssumplons 

Attkbute T es t Statistic Critical P•VakW Declslon(0.01) 

Va ri ances Variance Rat io F 2.51228 23.15450 0.39406 Equal Variances 

Distmution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.96972 0.88820 Normal Disbibu llon 


Conc -PI.Control Type Court Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minknum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 58.331 

100 S 198.92 70.053 317.38 92.456 

Graph ics 

1 1 

r 

1 

r 

t 

0 

a 100 

COM-% 

^ 

1 r 

e 

r 

i a 

r r a 

•r 

" n 

r 

1a •LS -tA -03 OA 0.S 1.a fA 

Idmklb 

000.092-101-1 CEfISTM vl.12revl Analyst Approval: 

r rrn 

. 

to 

-35-

CETIS An alysis Detail 

Comparisons: Page 8 al! 8 

Report Dale: 18 Jul-06 217 PM 

Analysis: 08.7364.887l/8154202psO 

Pl t Bioassay • Ch ronic CH2M Hi ll 

an 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sample Unk Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average Total WI (Dry. mg) Compa rison 16$985.7214 16 419857214 18JW-05ZITPM CETISA.12 

Method Alt H Data Wonsform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance I Two-Sample 


C>T Untranslamed 

NOOM 

100 MOO 1 WA 59.609E 

Control vs Cone-% Ststist le Critical P•VStuo MSD Dedsion(0.05) 

Arti ficial So'USed 100 -02489 1.85965 0.6951 12.0485 Nen•Slo ant Effe ct 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of SquaresMoan SquareDF FStatlstle P-Value Doelsion(C.05) 

Between 6.502558 &502588 1 0.06 0.80970 Non-SlgnifiantEffe ct 

Error 839.6294 104.9537 8 

Total 846.131982 111.45626 9 

ANOVAAUUmptions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Valuo Dacision(0.01) 

Variances Variance Hallo F 1.70337 23.15450 0.61853 Equal Variances 

DisUbu tion Shapiro-Wirt W 0.98503 0.84128 Normal Distribu tion 

Data Summa ry Orig in al Daft Transformed Data 

Cone-•,G ConbviType Cou ntMoan Minimum Maximum SD Moan Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 3 20.217 12223 33.384 8.8117 

100 5 21.830 GAT 38.17 11.500 

Graph ic s 

_ 

t 20 r I 

1 ^ 

1 1 • 

Y t 

i 

1 

1 

^ 

p 

1 

1 

1 -------------- 

1 

1 

' 

e 

0 100 4e -!j •1a -0.S O.e 0.f IA 1S I.e 

CarK-rh NnMitl 

000-092-101-1 CETlSr vl.1.2rev1 Analyst i"' Appraval: -36- 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1

^•âal 

of +^.r-tea 

^.+- 

^'ira^ 

.•-r-n-^t.++- 

..iilri --a..a ^.-••---.r.^n a 

ri W Ît . T"^9O^ 

fir_ 

^"L 

wr wr W 

lhW 7ww t^ôwsr^ 

aaO^v.YOn 

ia•w$d* pw ..vm0 

bmrawl 

wewm .tl....M 

O.aM.bwa 

aA.l.al^ 

n a4otl 

OaeMal 

^^ ]a^76Y 

âon.Y 

YaA..I 

ow" ) 

bwa•.^.wl 

mom 

Oft 

Nw 

Kea 

Atl 

.Wn 

I asuft 

oam1611 

].IAIMY 

â4dA1 

Y^Y 

Vsa...w.nYV w.d 4pw69aw..AMM+.P4 aa.oâ.d.^+6t 

S ^ 

6 h h P7 P L z u 

h h £ ] 

s s .. . 71001 

^^ 

wM wn .avnl two 0 ~u V ul MOM& 7w] 

IONRMFM 

-Awd L uiw ^n 0 IDNia^(a9ed 

.. 

£o-a xgcw)caa ;d 

.mmmowMV.IGSal ^L7' waewn^ a o 

Y


Pagel of 2 

Report Date: 18 Ju408 222 PM 

Test Link 10.723745161B154203ps8 

Plant Bioassay- Ctwonlc CH2M Hill 

Test No: 12-8841-7685 Test Type: PlanlChw1c; Duration: WA 

Start Date: , 25 Jan-08 Protocol: ASTM E1963.02 (2002) Species: Poa sandber9H 

Ending Date: DO Water. Source: 

Setup Dale: 25 Jan•06 Brinc 

Comments: recalculated Helgtd and Lerglhdata July 18, 2006 

Sample No: 15-5457-5144 Code: B1542-03 Client: 

Sample Date: 14 Nov-05. Material: Son Project: 

Receive Data: Source: Hanford 

Sample Age: 72d Ob Station: 

Comments: J1oDT8, E253101 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL CAV PMSD Method 

12-3597-7958 %Germination 100 2-100 WA 2260% Equal Variance tTwo•Sampte 

12-1749-26" Average AG WI (Wet. mg) 100 > 100 WA 50.83% Equal Variance tTwo sample 

05-2416-9275 Average AO Wt (Dry, mg) • 100 > 100 WA 63.25% Equal Variance tTwoSample 

06.5621-9654 Average Root WL (Wei mg 100 > 100 NIA 55.58% Equal Vamarnce tTwo-Sample 

015964-0324 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 61.46% Equal Variance tTwo-Sample 

03.3064.1255 Average Total Wt (Wei ma 100 > 100 WA 51.72% Equal Variance t1wo-Sample 

11831096105 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 :-100 WA 61.60% Equal Varlium t Two-Sample 


Cone-1/6Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 A thficial soWS 5 0.88000 0.60000 1.00000 0.05000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.84WO O.W= 1.00M 0.07483 0.18733 19.92% 

Average AG Wt (We%mW Surunary 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Moan Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 90.868 60.345 151.71 15.946 35.657 3924% 

Average AO Wt (Dry. mg) Summary 

Conc-% ConlrolType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 12.351 T.9275 19.275 2.1347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 1&718 11.128 30.637 3.6185 8.0912 48.40% 

Ave" Root WL (Wet. mg) Summary 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SO CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 11323 51.836 15&52 21.449 47.962 42.38% 

100 S 17214 121.90 270.5 211184 58.548 34.01% 

Average Rod WL (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone-ye Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 TJWA 3.78 14.108 1.8639 4.1678 5298% 

100 5 10.003 6.05 16.423 1.5129 4.0535 40.52% 

Average Total Wt (We t. mg) Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum. Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 177.14 91113 240.66 2&088 58.331 3293% 

100 5 263.01 195.11 42221 41.799 93.465 35.54% 



0 Artificial SOWS 5 20.217 12.221 33.384 3.9407 &8117 43.58% 

100 5 26.721 17.177 47.060 5.4021 12.079 4521% 

900-092.101-1 CETIS" vt1.2reA Anelysk-2Approval: 

-38-



Conc=6 Control7ype Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 1.00000 1.00000 1.000DO 0.60000 0.00000 

100 0.80000 1.00000 0.60000 0.80000 1.00000 

Average AG Wt (Wet, m9) Detail 

Cono'.G Control TYPe Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rap 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 67.2900 55.1900 62336 732233 41A750 

100 60.3450 90.5860 151.707 75DS75 78.6360 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) D" 

Cono-% Control Type Rapt Rap Rep Rap Rep 

0 Arseclal SOWS 15.1720 10.552 19.276 8.82688 7.92751 

100 11.4500 16.6780 30.6367 11.1275 13.698 

Average Root Wt. (Wet, mg) Detail 


0 Artificial SOWS 143.362 140.624 158.524 72.0233 51.6375 

100 134.765 172.182 270.5 121.905 161.350 

Average Root WL (Dry, mg) Detail 

Cone.-$A Control Type Rap 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rap 4 Rep 3 

0 AK&M SOWS 895601 8.39399 14.108 3.77999 4.295 

100 7.42999 11.1200 1&4233 6.04999 &99399 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) DOW 

Cone-% Control Type Rap 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 

0 Ar6fidal SOWS 210.652 195.814 240.882 14&247 93.1125 

100 195.11 262.768 422207 19&963 237.986 

Average Total WI (Dry, mg) Detail 


0 Ar06dal SoIVS 23.9280 18.948 33.384 12.6088 111 

100 1amo0 27.7980 47.0600 17.1775 22.69 


Report Date: 18 JL" 222 PM 

Test Unic 10-7237-4516IB154203psB 

OCM2-101-1 CETIS'n v1.1.2revl Analyst 2r- . Approval: 

-39-


Comparisons: Pays 1 of 7 

Report Date: 18 Jul-06 222 PM 

Analysis: 12.3597-795BI81542D3ps8 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type SampieLlnk ControlUnk DateAnslyt:ed Version 

%Germination Comparison 1D-7237.4516 10.7237.4518 18JuW8222PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeh NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

FAualVanancetTwo-Sampis C>T Angutar(Comecied) 100 >100 1 WA 2280% 


Control Vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P Value MSO Decislon(0.05) 

Artificial SoIVSedl 1DD 0137677 1.85955 03581 023508 Nonsignificant Erred 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value Daeislon(0.05) 


Error 0.3195545 0.039948 a 

Total 0.3252554 0.0456159 9 

ANOVAAssumptions 

Attribute Test Stallatie Critical P-Value Docision(0.01) 


Dlsb1buaon Shapiro-Witit W 0.85889 0.07404 Normal Dishibu5an 


Conc.-/. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Moan Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 0.88000 0.60000 1.00000 0.17889 120587 0.88608 1.34528 020835 

100 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 0.16733 1.15819 0.88808 1.34528 0.19317 

Graphics 

0.1 

Us 

01 

v:.. 

0 100 - -2A -LS -LO 45 U 03 U t.0 IA 

000-092-101.1 CEnSw vl.12revl Analyst I= Approval: 

.


Compariso ns: P802017 

Repo rt 

Dab: 18 JuW8 2.22 PM 

An0ys 1s: 12-1749-2677/B754203ps6 

Plant Bioassay. Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpolnt Analysis Type Sample Link Co ntrol Unit Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Compa rison 10.72374516 10.7237.4516 16 JUWS 2:22 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeb NOEL LOEL Toxic Un its ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T UnVanskmred 100 >100 1 WA. 50.83% 

G ro up Comparisons 

Control vs Cone,% Statistio Critical P-Value MSD Dedsk 0II(O.00 

ArtiBClal SOOTS" 100 -1.5438 1.85955 0.9194 32AS28 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Sou rce Sum of Squares Mean Squa re DF F StatisticP-Value Dedsion(0.0 

Between 1817.505 1817505 1 2.38 0.16127 Nm►Slgificant Effed 

Error 6102717 762.8397 8 

Total 7920.22268 2580.3450 9 

ANOVAAssumpBOns 

Attrib ute Test Statistic Critical P Vsk» Decision(0.01 

Variances Variance Ratio F 5.00000 23.15350 0. 14815 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapko-Wilk W 0.89115 0.17471 Normal Distributim 


Conn-% Co ntrol Type Cou ntMean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar tificial So0/S 5 63.903 41A75 82.336 15.948 

100 5 90.888 60.345 15 1.71 35.657 

Graphics 

t 

Be 

^, t r 

d t 

^ t 

^ t r 

i 

1 

o 

' 

o --------------r 

• 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

• r 

r 

. r 

e too 1s -u a.o ao oa os ss 1:5 1a 

ConoAb AaMAa 

Bob-092-1014 CET1s" v1.1.2'evl Mayst: b- AMrovat 

r 

. 

-41-




Analysis: 0&2416-Q27518154203psB 

Plant Bioassav-Chronic CH2M H10 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sampls Unk Control Unk Date Analysed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 10.7237-4516 10.7237.4516 18 Jul-06 222 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Unks ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance It 7wo-Sample C> T Unuarlafonned 100 >100 1 . WA 6325% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P•Value MSD Decbion(0.05) 

ArtiBciaiSOlySedl 100 -1.0394 1,85955 O.8355 7.8124 No"WMcantEffect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic 10-Value Dedsion(0. 

Between 47.67259 47.67259 1 1.08 0.32901 NonSigniBcanlEffect 

FJfor 353.0072 44.1259 8 

Total 400.679794 91.798492 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P HsWe Decision(o.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.8T331 23.15450 0.33110 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapko-Wilk W 0.84132 0.04578 Normal Distabution 

Daft Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 12351 7.9275 19278 4.TM 

100 6 16.718 11.128 30.637 8.0912 

Graphics 

r 

g 1 

S ' 

1 

1 

a 

e 100 

1 

.1-0 •ys 4-0 as 

r• 

, 

r 

, 

i 

OA eS sd >s 7-0• 

000.092-101-1 CETISmv1.12revl Analyst: a" Approval: —42— 

Is. 

r 

r 

• 

•


Plant 8foassay-Chronic 


Report Dab: 18 Jlt-08 222 PM 

Analysis: 065621-9654IB154203ps8 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Dab Analyzed Version 

Averao Root WL (Wet mg) Comparison 10.7237.4516 10-7237.4515 18Ju1-06222PM CETISvl.12 

Method All H Date Transform Zeta NOEL. LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance lTwoSample C>T Untranslormed 100 >100 1 WA 55.58% 

.Group Comparisons 

Control vs • Cone.% Statistic Critical P-Value - MSD Decision(0.05) 

ArtilIclal SdOSedl 100 -1.7403 145955 0.9400 62.9411 Nonsignificant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value Deefsion(0.05) 

Between 8674.86 8674.80 1 3.03 0.11998 Non-SWftant Effect 

Error 22913.1 2864.138 S 

Total 31587.9619 - 11838.998 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Declslon(0.01 

Variances Variance Ratio F 1A9014 23.15450 0.70857 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapllo•W& W 0.94145 0.56924 Normal Distribution 

Dab Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cono-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minknum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOIIIS 5 11323 81.635 15842 47.962 

100 8 1172.14 121.91 270.5 58548 

Graphics 

d t 

t IOD r • 

r 

I so 

I 

t 

r 

t ' 

0 

0 

cono'A 

IN 

60 

Is 

t 

r 

i 

• • r 

r 

.24 -Ls -La -U OA 03 Le 13 

tlaneas 

000-092-101-1 CETIS^ vl.1.2revl Analyst Approval• 

' 

' 

r 

74 

CH2111 1811 

-43-


Report Data: 18 Jui-06 222 PM 

Analysis: 01-5964-0324/8154203pe9 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Hi ll 


Endpoint Analysis Typo Semple Link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Root Wt (Dry, mill Compari son 10-7237.4516 10.72374516 18 JL" 222 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CIN PMSO 

Equal Va riance tTwoSample C> T UnIninafomied 100 >100 1 IWA 61.0% 


Control ve Cores-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dedelon(0.05) 

Artificial SoWSed 100 -0.8218 1.85955 0.7525 4.83508 Non-540 and Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Square& Mean Squa re DF F Statistic P-Valle Decision(0.05) 

Between 11.41551 11.41551 1 0.68 0.43488 NonSigrAant Effect 

Enor 1352142 16.90177 8 

Total 14(L629681 28.31728 9 


Att ribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Declslon(0A1) 

Varfanas Variance Ratio F 1.05701 23.15450 0.95844 Equal Variances 

Distribution ShaWo-Wi9O W 0.87437 0.11238 Normal Distrbubon 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Daft 

Coney. Control Type Count Mean M inimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Arbklal SOWS 5 7.8666 338 14.108 4.1678 

100 5 10.003 6.05 18.423 4.0538 

Graphics 

t i 

e ' r 

r 

. 

^ t r 

1 

t . • 

o 

' . r 

o too -10 -u •ta os 

' 

ao os to u u 

• Coscw awes 

-44- 

-DOO-092a 01-1 CETISn'v1.1.2revl Anayst 7r•ApprOraF^_ 

r 

r 

r


Plant Bioassay -Chronic 


Report Date: 18 j" 222 PM 

Analysis: 033064.1 25 81815 4 203psB 


Average Total Wt (Wet mg) Comparison 10.7237.4516 10.7237.4518 18 JUI-08222 PM CMV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zets NOEL L' EL Toile Units ChV PMSD 

Equal VariancelTwo-Sample C>T Untranstombd 100 >100 1 WA 51.72% 


Controlvs Conc•% Statistic Critical P•Value MSD Do"on(9.05) 

ArOfiUaI SaVSedl 100 -1.7428 1.85955 0.9402 01.6218 NonSlpnifieard Elba 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareOF F Statistic P Value Decislon(0.05) 

Between 18433.81 18433.81 1 3.04 0.11954 Non•SignificantEfled 

Error 48552-9 6D69.074 8 

Total 66988.4004 24502.881 9 

ANOVAAssunptions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Value Decision(0.01) 

Variances Varlance Ratio F 2-6740 23.15450 0.38338 Equal Varlan es 

DlsMIYAon Shapiro-Wa W 0.92031 0.35952 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Data Tnrrsformed Dab 

COW/*Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS S 177.14. 93.113 240AG 58.331 

100 S 263.01 195.17 42221 93.465 

Graphics 

B 

s 

Lso 

i 

r 

i 

• 

3 

t 

r 

z 

i • r 

a r 

• r 

e 

a roc ao •u .ze as os os r.o u sA 

Come-% 

sankita 

000-092.101-1 CEnSn V1.12reN AnayW. 5 Approval: 

CH2M Hip 

-45-



Report Date: 18 JuWS 222 PM 

Analysis: 08-510"105I8154203pa8 

Plant Bloassay • Chronic CH21101 Hill 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sampl. Unk Control Unit Analyzed Version 

Comparison 

Average Total Wt (Dry. nip) 

10.7237.45107 10-7237-4516 18 Ju400222 PM. CETISv1.12 

Method Aft H Daft Transform ZoW 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance ITwcSample C>T Untransfoened 11100 >100 1 WA 81.50% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Dedslon(0.08) 

Artificial SOIVSed 100 -0.9720 1.85955 OA204 12.4342 Non-Significant Efted 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square IW P Statistic P-Value Declslon(0.0 

Between 10&7444 105.7414 1 0.95 0.33922 Non-SigrificantEJlect 

Error 8942300 111.7788 8 

Total 999.975182 217.52325 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Crlmeel P•Velue Dselslon(0.01) 


Distribution Shapiro-Welk W 0.86171 0.07992. Normal Distribution 

Dots Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Conn'/+ Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artitidal SONS 5 20.217 12.223 33.364 8.8117 

100 5 20.721 17.177 47.060 12.079 

Graphics 

t 

- r 

g, r r 

0 

• r 

o too 2.0 43 -ta os 0.0 as in is t o 

corn% aa.Wts 

000&92-101-1 CETIS re v1.12revl Analyst: &- ApprovaN 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

-46-

Y 

L 

., Mq 9 

S 

1 41, 

wyMOW 

IN 

Il . E 

0011 a "-fftv 

So noT Ibhl 

$Y 210! 421 OA—W—" 

fS-0 101 L2 1 

2 1 r 

w wLrM w iw 

omw* n # 

aAWM ••^••w• 

o•wr•dN 

MZiUM *Miw wmn 

^ •O^ 

P^s.A OI 

'M1w 

^C^711'4^2^î7 

a+o••a 

o.e+ew 

aw•w 

.ww.r 

rN••rrr 

aa..+aa•wd•awuO 

pued.wH 

"MM rw..n.rn 

&--A 

ON rws•n." 

a•wr+r 

t1 N4.M 

aô•d•u 

v.raru 

aarw•a•PVl•••InÔ sooa..1tnw •+•or• 

n .^ M 9.^r 

+ t aw^m 

lr • 1 r ^ ..^ 

rwcas+^ 

'E 

ia.ww..aurpwM.mh.. ^+naw•Lro-t 

• S QL L Z 1 ^ 

c 

L O 

f s£ -C8 Y r 

PMMd ^{ M^..e cs 

AWSUP O4'ip M4 •wnl 

w. e m r.r 

w•M+o ti) 

WNRAWa aa0.rau i'MGOUIM w•Mn tt! ur^nea lop= 

L4W 9Arffn 'lWdtA PL Y9W cNaamri O ara 

ho .ztiS^S 

04M•r•. rp•M. 

sros•ô.rvta a 

a 

aQp ^[â ^K+.a" nda —nL•a`^—u La ^-9Am a/nw 

swvv1..0r4dm, o+nw 0"" atia 

"n KLMONO i.YM §= 

0



Report Date: 18 JUM 229 PM 

Test Unk: 20-0117.847718754204psB 

Plant 8loassay-Chronic CH21111 Hill 

Test No: 07-0052-4534 Test Type: Plant Chronic Duration: WA 

Start Date: 25 Jan48 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Species: Poa sandbeigil 

Ending Date: Dill Water. Source 

Setup Date: 25Jan-W Brine: 

Comments: recalculated Height and Length data July 18, 2008 

Sample Nor: 095315,2344 Code: 81562.04 ClienU 

Sample Date.. 15 Nov-05 Material: Sol Project: 

Receive Date: Source: Hanford 

Sample Age: 71d OA Station: 

Comments: J10DV2, E284601 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL CAV PMSD Method 

041690-0445 %Germination 100 >100 WA . 29.92% Equal VarianceItTwoSample 

08.29005287 Average Height (mm) 100 > 100 WA 19.39% Equal Valance tTwoSemple 

1362433925 Average Length (mm) 100 > 100 WA 21.48% Equal Valence tTwo-Sample 

08.75385589 Average AO Wt (Wet, mg) 100 >100 WA 22.90% Equal Vartence t Two-Sample 

08-4708-2181 Average AO Wt (Dry, mg) 100 3,100 WA 3276% Equal Variance ITwo-Sample 

13-2902-4325 Average RootWL (Wet mg 100 >100 WA 36.51% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

07-13989419 Average Roof WL (Dr)4 mg) 100 2.100 WA 44.15% Equal Valance t Two-Sample 

17-2700.9201 Average Total Wt (Wet mg 100 100 WA 28.88% Equal Valance lTwuSample 

07-7227-4367 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 100 WA 36.53% Equal Varlance (Two-Sample 

004092401.1 CETISw v1.12revl Analyst 'Sr Approval: 

-48-




0 Artificial SoWS 5 O.WWO 0.60000 1.00000 0.08000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 S 0.72000 0.40000 1.00000 0.12000 0.26833 3727% 


Conc-Y. Control Type Reps Moen Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 45.68 36.700 55.8 3.3895 7.5344 16A9% 

100 5 48.580 42AOO 61 3.3658 7.5282 15.50% 

Average Length (mm) Summary 



100 5 12246 109.6 146.5 6.9375 15.513 12.67% 

Average AD Wt (Wet, mp)Summary . 


0 ArOdal SOWS 5 63.903 41.475 62.338 7.1313 15.948 24.95% - 

100 5 58.544 46.670 66.636 3.3307 7.4477 12.72% 


Cone,% Control Typo Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 ArWcial SOWS 5 12.351 7.9275 19.276 21347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 10.669 92133 11.48 0.4217 0.9429 S.84% 

Average Root WL (Wet, mg) Summary 

Caw% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Ar66dal SOWS 5 11323 51.638 1511.52 21.449 47.962 42.36% 

100 5 100.99 80.410 115.9 5.8455 13.071 12.94% 

Avenge Root W L (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cona9.1 Control Type Reps Mean Minimun Maximum SE SD CV 

0 ArUdal SOWS 5 7.8668 3.78 14.108 1.8639 4.1678 52.96% 

100 S 6.5947 62133 6.925 0.1202 02689 4. WA 

Average Total Wt (Wet,mg)Summary 


0 ArbAcIal SoitlS 5 177.14 93.113 240.66 28.068 58231 3293% 

100 5 159.54 127.08 178.35 8.7345 19.531 1224% 


Cones% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 17264 15.427 1821 0.4928 1.1019 638% 


Report Dale: 18 JUI-06 229 PM 

Test link: 20-0117.84771B754204paB 

000-092-101.1 CETISte v1.1.2evl Analyst L Approval: 

-49-


%Germination Detail 

Cone-/ Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Artificial SoWS 1.00900 1.00000 1.60000 0.60000 0.80000 

100 0.60000 0.80000 OAOODO 1.00000 1.00000 

Average Height (mm) Detail 

Cone.% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 50.6 412 55.8 36.7000 435 

100 45.7000 43.7000 50 42AOOD 81 

Average Length (mm) Detail 

Cone.-,L Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 

0 Artificial SOWS 138.800 142 1532 993000 89.8000 

100 129.300 1157 146.5 1112 109.6 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Detail 

ConO-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 67.2900 55.1900 82.338 732233 41.4750 

100 62A5 46.6700 58.7450 582200 88.6360 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Detail 


0 ArO6cial SOWS 151720 10.552 19270 &82866 7.92751 

109 11.3900 921334 1028W 11.0220 11.46 

Average Root WL (Wet, mg) Detail 

ConrJA Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Aft5di 1 SOIUS 143.362 140.624 15&524 72.0233 51.6375 

100 115.897 80A700 10&985 99926 101.748 

Average Root YYL (Dry, mg) Detail 

Con" Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SoIUS 8.75601 &39399 14.108 3.77999 4295 

100 6.59334 621334 6.92499 BA92DO 8.75 

Avenge Total Wt (Wet. mg) Detail ' 

ConOA Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artlfklal SOWS 21D.652 195.814 240262 145.247 93.1125 

100 178.347 127.080 165.730 158.145 16&384 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, m9) Detail 

Conc-% Control Typo Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 AN11cial SoIUS 23.9280 18.946 33384 12.6066 122225 

100 17.9834 15.4267 17.185 - 175140 1821 

Page 3Ot 3 

Report Date: 18 J11-082:29 PM 

Test Link: 20.0117.8477/B154204pSS 

ODO-092-101-1 CETIS1Y v1.1.2revI Analysts Approval 

-50-


Plant Bioassay-Ch ronic 


Report Date: 18 JuW52:29 PM 

Analysis: 

04.1690.0445re154204psB 

Endpolnt Ana lysis Typo Sampl e, Un it 

Control Un it 

Date Analyzed Version 

%Germination Comparison 20-0117.8477 20-01178477 18JuW62:25PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Tole Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance lTw"ample C> T Angular (Corrected) 100 >100 1 WA 29.92% 


Control vs Cone•% Statistic Critical P Value, MSD Decwon(0.05) 

Ar tificial Sa'VSedt 100 1.08340 1.85955 0.1551 0.30265 No n-Signt icanl Effect 

ANOVATable 

Sou rc 

e Sum of Squares Mean Square, DF F StatisticP-Value Declsion(0.05) 

Between O.OT77281 0.077728 1 1.17 031020 Non-Significant Effect 

Error0.529773 0.086222 8 

Total 0.60750108 0.1439497 9 


Aftribute Test Statistic Critical P Valve Declslon(0.01 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.11043 23.15450 0.48725 Equal V&dances 

Distribution Shapiro•W9kw 0.90642 025730 Normal Dis tribu tion 

Data Summery Original Data Transformed Data 

CH2M Hill 

Cone-% Control Type, Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean MWmum Maximum SD 

0 A rtificial SOWS s 0.88000 0.6D000 - 1.00000 0.17889 120581 0.88808 1.34528 0.20635 

100 s 0.72000 D.40000 1.00000 026833 1.02949 0.68472 1.34528 029977 

Graphics 

a r 

r 

e0 

r 

CJ ^. • 

------ 

------------------ _ at 

f ' 

to .et • ^ 

as 

DA 

a 174 

CAN-% 

at 

. • ' t 

a 20 eta •tA 4U CA se, to 14 2e, 

000-092-101-1 CETISa' V1.12eA Analyst Z- Approval: 

r 

aMtits 

-51-


Plant Bioassay - Chronic 


Report Date: 18 JW-M 229 PM 

Ans"is: 08.2900-528713154204psB 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unit Control Unit Data Analyzed Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 20-0117.8477 20-0117$477 18 Jut-08 2:25 PM CETISY1.12 

Method AN M Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C> T Unbanebmred 11100 >100 1 WA 19.39% 


Control vs Cono-Y. Statistic Critical P Value MSO Decision(0.05) 

ArO0rlal SdVSedl 100 -0.8047 1.65955 01189 8.85821 Non-8108cant Effect' 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares. Mean Square DF F StsUsW P Vaara Daeislon(0.65) 

Between 20.73602 20.736 02 1 0417 0.56212 Non-SWkent Effect 

Error 453.6399 58.70499 5 

Total 474.375938 77.441005 9 

ANCVAAssumptlons 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical PValus Declsion(0.01) 



Data Summary Original DNa Trantsforrned Data 

Cono-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 ArtiBdal SolllS 5 45.68 36.7 55.8 7.5344 

100 5 48X60 42.4 61 7.5252 

Graphics 

_E 

r 

r r 

r 

r 

0 

3 

r 

_r 

r 

•r 

• r 

r 

• r 

rr 

• r 

r • 

r • 

0 100 4a -15 -Le -0S 0.0 U to t.s is 

cof,-% aanxlte 

OOMU-101-1 CETiS nn %1.12ravl Approval: 

• 

CH2M Mil 

-52-



Report Date: 18.IuM 229 PM 

.Analysis: 13.62433925(81542D4psB 

Plant Sioassry - Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Semple Unk Control Link D ate Analysed Version 

Average Length(mm) Comparim 20-0117-8477 20-0117.8477 18Ju406228PM CETISV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it s ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance It TwoSampla C>T Un trans(ormed 11100 >1oo . 1 WA 21A6% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Valw MSD Decleion(0.05) 

Artifi cial SolVSedl 100 0.15020 1.85955 0.4422 28.7415 Non-SigreBwnt Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squ ar es Man SquareDP F Statistic P-Va lue De cislor m 1(0.05) 

Between 11.66402 11.66402 1 0.02 0.88432 NonSignMwntEfe ct 

Error 4138.00 517.0074 8 ' r 

Total 4147.72359 528.67147 9 


Attribute Test Statisti c, Crfti al P Value Declsion(O.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 3.29588 2115450 027455 Equal Variances 

Distribu tion Shapko-WOk W 025238 0.69675 Normal Distribution 


Con o-% Control Type Cou ntMan Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 ArtiOcIal S08lS 5 124.62 89.8 1532 25.167 

100 5 12246 109.8 146.8 15.513 

Graph ic s 

v 

.000092-101-1 

1 i 

1 

1 

_^ 

ti 

1 

•1 

< 1 11 

• • 1 

a ; 

s 

• o IN •7a 

cEnsw 

V1.1.2re v1 

1 

1• 

1 

-LS -IA o! Oa tb.s Ia u u 

b„ 

Anayst Apprevat: 

• 

—53-


Plant Bioassay - Chronla 


Repo rt Date: 18 JIAA5 229 PM 

Analysis: 08-7538.5589MI 54204psS 

Endpoint An al ysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average AGWt(Wet, mg) Comparison 20-0117.8477 20-0117-6477 18Jt"52:28PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zub NOELLOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal VanaricetTwoSample C>T Untransfommed 11100 >100 1 WA 2290% 


Control vs Cono•% Sta tistic Critical P-Value MSD Dectsion(0.05) 

Artificial Soi GWI 100 0.68085 1.85955 02576 14.6362 Non-Slgnificanl Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F StatisticP-Value Deeielon(C.05) 

Between 71.79871 71.79871 1 0.48 0.51517 Non•Sipdfipnt Effect 

Error 1238.995 154.8743 8 

Total 1310.79348 226.67305 9 


Attribute, Test Statistic Critical P•Value De4slon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 458421 23.15050 0.16944 Equal Variances 

Olstrfbu tion Shapira-Wilk W 0.96968 0.85975 Normal Dis tribution 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Dub 

Corn-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean M inimum Maximum SD. 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 63,903 41AT5 82.338 15.946 

100 5 58544 46.67 68.638 7.4477 

Graphics 

1 

a 1 D j 

b 1 

1) 1 16 ^ • 

S / q 1 

A 

i 1 

1 1 1 

1 

.10 

1 

-11 

1 

1 

• 1 

0 

a 

140 

•td -13 •U -0S U as la Ls 

Cone-% 

000-092-101 .1 CETISTI v1.1.2revl Analyst; s"— Approval: 

+3^ 

ZIP 

i 

1• 

1 

IUn4nf 

CHIN Hill 

Le 

-54-



Report Data: 18 JuI-W 229 PM 

Analysis: 08.4706.21811BIS4204psB 

Plant Bloassay • Chronic CH2M Hilt 


Average AG Wt(Dry. mg) Compa ri 

son 20-0117.8477 20-0 117.5477 1814-062:25 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeh NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it s ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance tTw o-Sample C> T Untrarnfomied 100 >100 1 WA 32.76% 

Group Compa risons 

Control vs Cone,% Statistic Cr it 

ical P-Value MSD Deefsion(0.0 5) 

Artificial SoWSedl 100 0.77289 1.85955 02309 4.04827 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Stat istic P.Vafue Decisloo(0.05) 

Between 7.070768 7.070768 1 0.80 0.46161 Non-Slgni6antEffect 

Err or 94.89486 11.83583 8 

Total 101.765432 18.907601 9 

AMOVAAssumptlons 

Attribute Test StatIstle Critical P•Valu• 13"Iston(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ra0o F 25.62671 23.15450 0.00825 Unequal Va riances 

Distribution Shapho.Wllk W 0.94329 0.59015 Normal Dls trDUtion 

Data Stunmary Original Data Transformed Data 

Conc-% Co ntro l Type Count Moan Minimum Maximum SD • Moan Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 12351 7.9275 19276 4.7733 

100 5 10.669 92133 11.46 0.9429 

Graphic . 

t i 

_ t r • 

r 

t r 

^^ 

1 r • • 

_ 

0 

r 

s r tr 

t 

• r r 

o rm .yo -ts •ta a.s os as w u 1.s 

C^x aanata 

000-092-101.1 CETIS" v1.12 rvA Analyst a"' Approval

CEM Analysis Detail 

Plant Bloassay . Chronic 

Comparisons: 


Repo rt Date: 18 JuWS 229 PM 

Analysis: 13.2902-43281B754204058 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Un it Control Unit Analyzed Version 

Avenige Root WL (Wet, mg) Comparison 200117.8477 20-0117.8477 18JuW8228PM CETIS 52 

Method Ali H Data Transform Ale 11 NOEL LOEt. Toxic Un its ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t7Wo-Sample C>T Untransformed 11100 >1DO 1 WA 3651% 


Control vs Con" Statistic Critical P•Valus MSD Wei .0 

Artificial S&Sedi 100 0.55061 1.85955 02985 41.3408 Nonsignificant Ef fect 

ANOVATable 

Sou rce Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P•Vak,e Wdslon(OA 5) 

Between _ 374.6069 374.6069 1 0.30 0.59693 Non-SlgNficantEffect 

Error 9884.932 1235.615 8 

Total 10259.5385 1610.2134 9 


Attribute Test Sta tistic Critical P Value D•cilon(0.01) 


Distribu tion, Shapiro-Witt W 0.95660 - 0.74721 Normal DlseDution 

Data Summary original Data Transformed Data 

Cone-IL Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Arefictal Sc il/S .5 11323 51.636 151152 47.962 

100 5 100.99 80.410 115.9 13.071 

Graphic 

t ^ 

i , • 

t 

e 

00002-1011-11 

3 , ,, 

0 100 .14 •13 •1A -05 OA 0.S IA to 710 

f:•„0•'h 

, 

, 

, 

, 

Ibakits 

cEnsaw:taenyar zf- 

Appmvd 

CH2 1111 HUI 

—56—



Report Data: 18 JUW6 229 PM 

Analysis: 07.1396.9419I0154204ps 

PWnt Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unit Unk Date Analysed Version 

Ave" Root WL (Dry, mg) Comparison 20-0117.8477 20-0117.6477 18 JU-06 2:28 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t TwoSample C > T Unlransksmed 100 >100 1 NIA 44.15% 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dectsion(0.08) 

ArtlWal SoWSedl 100 0.68096 1.85955 02576 3.47318 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P Value Dedsion(0.0 5) 

Between 4.044082 4.044082 1 0.45 0.51512 Nm•SlgnillcantEftxt 

Error 69.77014 &721288 8 

Total 73.8142233 12.765349 9 


AHr11wt• Test Statistic Critical P•V•lu• Dsclslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 240.25800 23.15450 0.00010 Unequal Vadences 

Distribution Shaplro-Wilk W 0.83816 0.04194 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Dale Transformed Data 

Corw% Control Type Count Mean Mlnlmum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maxhnum SO 

0 ArtiBdal SOWS 5 7.8660 3.78 14.108 4.1678 

1D0 5 &5947 8.2133 6.925 02689 

Graphics 

LO 

r 

i • 

2 W r 

0.74 

Yx 

dy i 

1 

r ri 

• • 

ata -------'- + 

r----------- 

st i r 

0.1 r r 

0.0 r 

e lac .t,e -u •u as 40 os u u 74 

• CORO-% aaniats 

000-092-101-1 CETISar VIAzev1 Analysts Approval 

r 

r


Comparisons: Page aof9 

Report Date: 1S J" 2.29 PM 

Analysis: 17-2700-920l/B754204ps8 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH211 H ill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Samplo Unk Control Unk Date Analytad Version 

Average TOW Wt (We%mg) Comparison 20-0117-6471 20-0117.8477 iBJ"228PM CETISvl.12 

Method Alt H DataTrnntonn Zda 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Va riance l Two-SampleC>T Untramtomad 11100 x100 1 WA 2&W% 

Group Comparison 

Control vs Cone.% Statistic Cr it ical PValue MSD Dsdston(0.05) 

Ar tificial SONSedl 100 0.63977 1.65955 02701 51.155 Non -Sogficanl Effect 

ANOVAT" 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P•Value Dedskin(0.05) 


Error 15135.66 1891.966 6 

Total 159102910 2666.3927 9 

ANOVAAssumptlons - 

Attribute Test Statis ti 

c Critical P Value Dsoision(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F &91986 23.15450 0.05688 Equal Variances 

Dlsftugon Shapiro-W ilk W 0.94991 0.66736 Normal Dlstritution 


Cono-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean 

0 Arti ficial SOUS 5 177.14 93.113 240.85 5&331 

100 5 15954 127.08 176.35 19.531 

Graphics 

t so 

d 1 

g 1 

p 

1 

1 

e 

Minimum Maximum SD 

i 

'1 

^1 

1 

• 1 

• ^ 1 

1 

_ 1 

0 too 45 -1A -043 OA e.3 111 U 1A 

cofo-% Pankas 

000-092-101-1 CETIS m v1.12ravl Analyst_ Approval. -58- 

' 

1 

1 

1



Report DaW: 18Ju146229 PM 

Analysis: 07-7227.4367/0154204psB 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Anatysls Type Semp le Link Control Link Debi Analyzed Veralon 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 20-0117.8477 2060117-8477 18 JUI.OB 228 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method An H Data Transform Zeta K NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal VWW"tTwoS=Pla C>T Untranslomwd 100 >100 1 WA 36.5^ 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dedslen(0.05) 

Artificial Sod/Sedt 100 0.74372 1.85955 02392 7.38505 Non-SIgNBcant Effect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Valve Dsdslon(0.05) 

Between 21.80978 21.80978 1 0.55 OA7832 Nan-Signi8lant Effect 

Error 3154434 39.43043 8 

Tote 337253202 6124021 9 


Attribute Test Statistic critical P-Value Dedefon(0.01) 

Variances Variance RatioF 83.94633 23.15450 0.00141 Unequal Vadanoes 

Obbibuson Shapiro-Wilk W 0.88817 0.15347 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Date 

Cone-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 20.217 12723 33.384 8.8117 

100 5 17.264 15.427 18.21 1.1019 

Graphics 

1 I r 

i 

1 1 

i 

r 

1 

• 

1 

! 

r 

r 

r • 

$ r • 

. 

• i rrr 

i 

• • r 

0 •1 r 

0 too -2a -13 -IA -0.0 U e1 is 1! to 

CenPK Rankle 

000.092-101-1 CETISw v1.1.2revl Analyst; ttf Approval: 

—59-

Y 

Wo.w P. 

PAOIi A 

avP 8 

a.pcw c 

Rwbw*q 

I,w,I..\PM Ne 

BLUEGRASS GROWTH TEST 

Cl c ".Owd Pp.R 

T.^}INDR.:PYritPbe 

.,eYR c+ra_ y wrasL-L_ B.7w 3LLC"w._or7(,ôa l 

X` ^ 

^ 

Td pP 

cow— IVJUHQ. 

700z 

nwkw. 

fipasN c 

w.sw. 

P^.*W. 

R.p.WA 

riWp.nt 

PREtwommu 

N..1.r,r 

P, " 

0EMLVL)M 

(N..Awr 

w,RNS 

SWaW m. FSN701,SW DCS4 s- o 

.\..a.QWMK W 441.& PH 

PO.T• 74AYSPOST. 

HIWIQO A 

cu ePw aJ 1 

9MBOD" 

VI Jo 

A 1 

e 

0 2 14 

B 0 1 

E o p O 

WAYS POST• 

IMEPOENC. 

°• 

wom 

ro PwRm 

P►+.L 

P...a NR 

fMC..Pyfb S..n M.e^SYp .MI...reM.^...lp} DiM.laal.Pprr[s 

s + 3 .•. ds.d 1 

7I.^ 7w NN ••1 f 5..1 p^.^, 

♦ .a4,4S4 f w 2 ♦ Lieu& al. + J 

r ..S s... fl 

R.pIgN. • 

R.P...Yc 

. aP.orB 7 

PN..wReolt.dK ,n LP M 9\ 

pgrlioa0 A S .a, ... m ,P., .v. 

.rR..R.Nwsok 

o"Wo" 

euR..e.: 

c .., 4 3 

0 9 z • ,,,,, m„ 

A 

T\^T.nwl w.,w wL 

103$ `l 

e 1140'•, O .a1 

we 0 W73.1 

0 1 Eo37• . Pik 

e 00 OO ^ 

'73.e 

—^SA- —60—

CETIS Test Summa ry 


Repo rt Date: ISJul-062:52 PM 

Test Link: 05.7949-163218154205ps8 

Plant 8 1oassay - Chronic CH2M HIg 

Test No: 11-2341-2652 TestTy(w: Plant Ch ronic Duration: WA 

Start Date: 25 Jan-06 Protoc ol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Sped": Poe sandbe:gl 

End in g Date: DO Water: Source: 




Sample Dale: 15 Nov-05 Material: Sol Project: 

Rece ive Dab: Source: Hen(ord 


Comments: J10DVI, E284701 

Comparison Summa ry 

Analysis Endpoint NOEL LDEL ChV PMSO Method 

03.1273-9210 % Germination 4100 100 WA 31.94% Equal Ve¢arwe t Tw"ample 

15{6901.OM Average Height (mm) 100 > 100 WA 20.15% Equal Variance t Two %ample 

16-8177-0725 Average Length (mm) 4100 100 WA 2234% Equal Variance t TWoSampls 

07-6293-0217 Average AG Wt (Wet, mg)


%Germination Summary - 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SONS 5 098000 0.60000 1.W000 0.08000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.36000 0.001100 090000 0.13266 029665 8240% 


Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Aniii" SONS 5 45.68 36.700 559 3.3695 7.5344 16A9% 

100 5 41.75 34 50.5 3A187 6.8374 16.38% 



0 ANScW SONS 5 124.62 89900 1532 12.597 25.167 22.60% 

100 5 91.325 83.300 1011.5 3.9303 7.8808 8.61% 

Average AO Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 

Cone-% COnMOIType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Artficial SONS 5 63.903 41A75 82.338 7.1313 15.946 2425% 

100 5 30.850 24.98 37.84 26585 5.317 1723% 

Avenge AD Wt (Dry, mg) Surr mmy 


0 Artificial SoiVS 5 12351 7.9275 19.275 2.1347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 6.7013 52401 1125 0.6181 12361 18A5% 

Average Root Wt. (Wet, mg) Summary 


0 Ani6ciai SOWS 5 11323 51.635 158.52 21.449 47.962 42.36% 

100 5 40.9117 24.595 68.755 10.002 20.005 46.81% 

Avenge Root WL (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 


100 5 3.33 202 59500 0.6588 1.7172 51.57% 

Avenge Total Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 

Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Atn" SONS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 26.086 58.331 32.93% 

100 5 71.846 49575 10&59 12.573 25.146 35.00% 


Cono-% Conrol Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SOBS 5 20.217 12223 33.364 3.9407 8.8117 4358% 

100 5 10.031 7.8101 14.100 1A105 2.821 28.12% 


Report Date: 16 JuWM 252 PM 

Test Link: M7949.18=15420508 

000-092-101-1 CETIS^ v1.12revl Analyst: 8"' Approval: 

-62-





100 020000 OA0000 0.80000 0.40000 0.00000 

Average Height (mm) Deh9 


0 Artificial SOUS - 50.6 41A 55.8 36.7000 43.5 

100 34 50.5 42.5 40 M"ng 


Cone-% Control Type • Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 138.000 142 1532 99.3000 89.8000 

100 95 100.5 83.3000 88.5 A4fssin9 

Average AG Wt (Wek mg) Detag 


0 Artificial SoWS 672900 55.1900 82.338 732233 41.750 

100 30.98 37.84 29.835 24.98 Missing 



0 Arbklai SoiUS 15.1720 10552 192713 8.82608. 7.92751 

100 524005 8.25 650499 6.81 Wssiry 

Avenge Root WL (Wet, m9) Deta9 


0 kirficial SoWS 143.362 140.624 158524 72MM 51.6375 

100 4223 68,755 28.3675 24.5950 Msslng 


Cone-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep S 

0 Artificial SONS 675601 8.39399 14.108 3.77999 4295 

100 257001 5.851)01 2.01999 287997 Missing 

Avenge Total Wt (ylWel, mg) Detail 


0 Artificial SOUS ' 210.652 195.814 240.862 145.247 911125 

100 7321 106.595 68.0025 49.575 Missing 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mg) Detail 

Cone-% Control Type Rep / Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Ar0liciat SOUS 23.9280 18.948 3322 12.5W6 122223 

100 7.81006 14.1000 8.52499 9.68997 Missig 


Report Date; 19 Ji1.06 252 PM 

Teat Link: 06-7949-1832B154205psO 

000-092-101 . 1 CETIS1M %1.12reN Analyst: Approval: 

-63-



Report Date: 18 JuW6 252 PM 

Analysis: 031273-92101B154205ps B 

Plant Bloassay • Chronic C112M Hel 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

%Cemtktation Compadsan 08.7949.1832 08.7949.1832 18Ju408251•PM CETISv1.1.2 


Equal Variance t Two-Sampte C a T Angular (Corrected) A 

-64-



Report Date. 18 J" 2:52 PM 

Analysis: 1 SI9Ot-9988IB154205psil 

Plant Blaassay • Chronic CH21A Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link ControlUnk Date Analyzed Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 067949.1032 06.7949.1832 10 Jut W 2:51 PM CETISVI.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL ME L Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal VarfancelTwoSample C>T Untransfomred 100 >100 1 WA 20.15% 

Group Comparisons . 

Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P Value MSO Deeisloo(0.05) 

Artificial SolVSedl 100 0.80875 1.89458 02228 92DS42 Non-ftntfkant E(Md 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DIM F Statistic 13-Value Decision(0.03) 


Error 367.318 52.474 7 

Total 401.639954 88.7955 8 


AtlrUmA• Test Statistic Critical P•Value Declslon(0.01) 

Variances Varianoe Ratio F 121427 46.19462 0.90942 Equal Var ia nces 

DbtribWon Sha*o-Wik W 0.94354 0.61966 Normal DisbPouWn 

Daft Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cono-PA Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 43.68 36.7 5" 7.5344 

100 4 41.75 34 50.5 6.8374 

Graphics 

?€ 1 

6 

1 i 

t 

r 

nn 

p i 

1 

1 

1 • 

`LC a _____________+ ________ 

7 

1 

• 1 

a 

a 

NO 

•t 

•Ls -Ls -45 

1 

ad as to 

Coro-% 

a rAdt; 

004092-101-1 CETIS'evl.12rev1 Analyst a.. AWMval' —65— 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Ls



Report Date: 18 Jul-06 252 PM 

Analysis: 168177-0725lB154205ps6 

Fiant Bloassay - Chronic CHZM H01 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unk Data Analyzed Version 

Average Length(mm) Comparison 06-7949.1832 067949.1832 18Jul-082:51PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Trensfono Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Varianoe tTwo-Sample C> T Untratmfomled

CETIS-Anal sis Detail 

Comparisons: Paps 4 d 9 

Report Date: 18.1" 252 PM 

Analysis: 074 283412178754205psB 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH214 Htii 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Wet. mg) Comparison - 0679491832 06-7949.1832 18 Jul-08 2:51 PM CETISV7.12 


EqualVariancetTwo-Sample C>T Unbansfomrad


Comparisons: Pops of 9 

Report Date: 18 JuW6 252 PM 

Analysis: 03.1375.3508815420SpsB 

PlantBloassay-Chronic CH2MNil 

Endpoint Ann" Type Sample Link Control Link Data Analyzed Version 

Average AGWI(Drymg) Comparison 05.7949-ta32 06.7949.1832 1BJuW6Z51PM CETISv1.12 


Equal Variance lTwoSample C> T Unbanslamwd


Comparisons: Page 8or9 

Report Date: 18 Jul-OS 2., 52 PM 

Analysis: OS7553.MA3154205p56 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH2M HID 

Endpoint Ana ly sis Type Sample Unk Control Un it Date Analysed Version 

Average RootWL (Wel,m9) Comparison 08-7949-1832 06-7949.1832 IBJUI-06251PM CETISv1.12 

Method Aft H Date Transform Zeta NOEL 70EL Toxic Units CAV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two Sample C>T Untranetormed


Plant Bioassay . Chronic 

Comparisons: Pavlof 9 

Report Date: ISJuWG 252 PM 

Ansly51s: 1&2030.1795+5754205psB 

Endpoint . Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Rod WL (Dry, mg) Comparison W79491832 08.7949.1632 18 Jul-08 251 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Dais Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PUSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C> T ' Untransformed


Comparisons: Page aof 9 

Report Dais; 18 Jul-08 2:52 PM 

Analysis: "94.78453154205psB 

Plant Bloassay. Chronic CH2M Nil 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Llnk Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Comparison 067949.1832 D6.7949-1032 18 Jui-08 2:51 PM CETISv1.12 

Method AR H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance l Two-Sample C>T Unbanslomnod



Report Dale: 18 JuWG 2.52 PM 

Analysis: 06-5495-12WB154205psB 

ant Bioassay. Chronic CN2M Rig 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Un it Dote Analyzed Ve rsion 

Average Total Wt (Dry. mg) Compar ison 067949-1832 067949.1832 18 Jut-05 2:51 PM CETISA.12 

Method AN H Daft Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Links CW PMSO 

Equal Variance It Two-Sample C>T Untnansformed

Rory. M 

A.pkL A 

11.pAaY s 

A.p1eYC 

Ryenl.D 

R.ppo l 

^y Don.aAe 


G1oR IYAoO Paod TW Sae DMR DVZriuW 

Y+WC DD/D—Sl—'-- Dq'R 23— DgM—L4 C"H_L n'ê a'^ 

car. IEPUrATe 

taox: 

Tap. r.wc." 

A pps A 

"- S 

P.O r C 

P., 4D 

R.peoY S 

M r SA wt 

Pe• PWAO 

M..WASM Wewk 

(L IM•+ 

D.aO.walip....cA 

R.gaMA 

R.p.00 e — 

Rgipel.c 

Rw. * 

Rs. a — 

e.o.R ..o 

M Aml W0gft 

Owwa w4 

rRSa+ER EMM 0D'Amare 

loan. n. IN e.Mw 

OW&W pwe-pl 

SWVWK).- EzesTDtsax b/S4i•p(. 

SeeeesSemAr40 4.f,76 PH . 

POST. r. 

Bs.ACeRa 

De e.A 

11^-Z:WPmill 

A r r r 

e O S 

0 2 

B 2 

it 

^1911^CSft."^rf 

m:^ &Y-walri ms UOV.Tl^3r^' 

W-M-W :. . 1kîzi^^3 

T.. WL iq m YI.t WI m 

A JS6:Z q(/1 

p e Z'tZ.1 

D eo .O -S -4 o 0" 

D 2. 1 30 (. l 100r. B 

E 002. 1 1 ..'3 1011 

p40MTSRDa7• 

Epeeoori 

Rem 

3 

e atML 

NM3e+Op 

n+K 

^^,,,, 

PWNO 

7 

g, rZ.,H,S', 9 

Joe 10 1 3,10, 1 

S e L; to 

to ,q 

A /yl WIS 

-73-



Report Date. 18 JuW6 U5 PM 

Test Urk: 163853.4T31B154206ps8 

Plant Bioassay- Chronic CH2M Hill 

Test No: 19.1695-5839 Test7yps: PlantChroniee Duration: WA 

Start Date: 25 Jan-08 Protocol: ASTM E1983-02 (2002) Species: Pos sandtrerpii 

Ending Date: DII Water: Souroe: 

Setup Date: 25 Jan-08 Brian 

Comments: recalW ftd Height and Length data July 18, 2000 

Sample No: 094115.2498 Code•. 61542.08 Client: 

Sample Date: 16 Nov-05 Material: Sol Project: 



Comments: J70DV3, E285701 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL ChV PMSD Method 

11-4813-1916 %Germination 100 >100 WA 37.51% Equal VadancelTvgSempla 

09.3544-0763 Average Height (mm) 100 31100 WA 25.79% Equal Variance t TwoSampie 

013057.8010 Menge Lengel (mm) 100 >100 WA 24.52% Equal Varlanos t TwoSgnWW 

0949373263 Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) 100 2.100 WA 44.0% Equal Variance l Two•San0a 

17-9077-0135 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 33.63% Equal Variance t Two Sampis 

1048923286 Average Root WL (Wet mg 100 :.100 WA 37.75% Equal Variance tTwo-Sampb 

13-4344-1355 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 >100 WA 45.34% Equal Variance tT o-Sampie 

07-1360-0140 Average Total Wt (Wet, mg 100 > 100 WA 34.53% Equal Varianoe l7MaSample 

08.439449M Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 37.33% Equa) Variance tTwo4ample 

000-092-101-1 CET1Sarvt.l.2revl An Analyst Approval: 

—74—

CEfIS Test Summary 

%Germination summary 


0 Artificial SoIVS 5 0.88000 0.60000 1.00000 0.080110 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.64000 020000 1.00000 0.161100 0.35777 55.90% 


Cone•Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 MifidalSOWS 5 45AS 3&700 554 3.3095 7.5344 1&49% 

100 5 47.38 36 64 5.3659 11.998 25.33% 



0 Artificial SOWS 5 124.62 89.800 1532 IZ597 21L187 2260% 

100 5 107.74 87.8 148 10.557 23.807 21.91% 


Conc-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Arti6dal SOWS 5 63.903 41.475 82.336 7.1313 15.946 24415% 

110 5 BOA21 38.58 110.67 13.681 30591 50.63% 

Avenge AD WI (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone=/. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Arifioal SOWS 5 12.351 .7.9275 19275 2.1347 4.7733 38.65% 

ADO 5 8.9213 7.106 10 1167 ' 0.6582 1A715 1&50% 

Average Root WL (Wat, mg) Summary 



100 5 84.544 64.510 103.88 82686 18489 21.87% 

Average Root WL (Dry, mill Summary 

Conc-/, Con trol Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 5.1266 3.9520 624 OA523 1.0114 1933% 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mill Summary 

Cone-% ControlType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Ar66da1SoWS 5 177.14 91113 240.88 28.088 58.331 32.93% 

100 5 144.97 101.89 20&61 2DA96 45932 31.62% 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mill Summary 


0 Artificial SOWS 5 20217 • 12223 33,384 3.9407 59117 4358% 

100 5 14.048 11.058 15.850 0.9893 2.1673 1543% 


Report Date: 18 Jul-W 3.:05 PM 

Test unit 18.36534T3tMI54206ps8 

000-092-101.1 CETISm'v1.12rov1 Analyst 8^' Approval: 

-75-



Cone-% Cont ro l Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 


100 020000 1.60600 1.00000 0.80000 0.40000 



0 Artrldal SOWS 50.8 41.8 55.8 36.7000 43.5 

100 64 38.8 36 553000 42.5 

Average Length (mm) Dotal 

Con e 

.% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Ar tificial SOWS 138.800 142 153.2 99.3000 89 18000 

100 148 87.6 95.8000 107.300 100 

Average AG Wt (Wet, m ill Detail 

Coro-% Con tr ol Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Ar tificial SoWS 67.2900 55.1900 82.338 732233 41.4750 

100 110.67 36.68 51.1800 082900 37.405 

Average AG Wt (Dry, m ill Dotal[ 

ConCAL Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artifidal SoiVS 15.1720 10.552 19278 8.02688 7.92751 

100 8.94000 7.10599 9.73401 10.8667 7.96002 

Average Root WL (Wet, mg) Deta9 

Cone,% Con trol Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 


1DO 97.9399 65.3100 91.082 10188 64.5100 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Detail 


0 Arti ficial SOWS 8.75601 8.39399 14.108 3.77999 4295 

100 623999 3.95200 6.11600 4.83999 4AS499 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Deb9 

Cone */ Con trol Typo Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Arti ciaiSOWS 210.652 195.814 240.862 145.247 911125 

1 DO 208.61 101.890 142.242 170.17 101.915 

Ave" Total Wt (Dry, mg) Deta il 

Cone-1/6 Con tr ol Type Rep 1 Rep 2 r Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SoW3 219280 18.946 33484 12.6088 122225 

100 15.16 11.058 15.8500 15.7066 124450 


Report Dale: 16 JuW5 3:05 PM 

Test LMIC 163653473178154206ps3 

000492-101-1 CE71sw W.12revl AnalysZ^_ 3" Appmrd: 

_76_

CUTS Analysis Detail 

Comparisons: Pop 1 or 9 

Report Date: 18 JuF06 US PM 

Analysis: 11.4813.19161e154206pse 

Plsntelonsay-Chronlo - CHZNH81 


%Germination Comparison 163853.4731 163653.4731 18JuW63.05PM CETISV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zats NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PNSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C 2-T Arguiar (Co reow) 100 2-100 1 WA 3751% 


Control vs Cores% Stat"a Critical P-Value MSD DedWW(0.05) 

Artificial SONSem 100 1.30924 1.85958 0.1134 0.37044 Non•Soniflcent Effect 

ANCVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P-Value Declsion(0.05) 

9etNeen 0.1700565 0.170059 1 131 - 072680 Non ftnifi snt Effect 

Error 0.7936922 0.099212 S 

Total 0.96375073 02892700 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Vale• Dedsion(OA1 


Distribution Shapko.Wik W 0.94392 0.59737 Normal Distribution 


Conc-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOIVS 5 0.88W0 0.60000 1.00000 0.17889 1.20501 0180608 1.34528 0.20635 

1DO 5 0.64000 020000 1.00000 0.35777 0.94500 0.46365 1.34525 0.39477 

Graphics 

i 

0. 1 • • 

1 

U 1 

03 01 1 1• • 

--------------------------- 1 

All 1 

0* -at 1 111 

0.1 

OA 

• 1 

1 • 

1 

0 200 •]d •IS •yp 43 dD 0.5 IA U ?A 

cwn % FaMJes 

000-092-101-1 . CET1Sm 0.1.2revl Analysis a" Approval: 

1 

-77-

CEfIS Analysis Detail 

Comparisons: P"02019 

Report Date: 18 JUI-O6 3A5 PM 

Analysis: 09.354"76WB154206psB 

Plant Bloassay _ Chronic CH2M "in 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Llnk Data Analyzed Version 

Average Heigh (mm) Comparison 163653-4731 16,1653-4731 18 Jule 3:05 PM CET1S0.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PUSO 

Equal Variance tTwo.Sample C>T Unbamlomted 11100 >100 1 NIA 25.79% 


Control vs Conc-% sta tist ic Critical P.Value - MSD Decielon(0.05) 

Ar tificial SalVSern 100 .02651 1.85955 0.6012 113823 Non.Siw0Mnt Effect 

ANOVATable . 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Sta ti stic P•Value D•ctaion(O.05) 

Between 7.056003 7.()56003. 1 0.07 0.79760 Non%Sigr Kant Effect 

Error 802.92 100.365 8 

Total 2109.975988 107.42100 9 


Attribute Test Stati stic critical P•Vatu• D•ciston(0.01) 


Disb9xrilon Shap iro-W&W 0.92698 0.41689 Normal Distribubm 

Data Sumnw" Original Data Transformed Da ta 

Cores% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SoL1S 5 45.68 36.7 55.8 7.5344 

100 5 47.36 36 64 11.998 

Graphic 

_ r 

t 

r 

• 

g 

a: 

1 

1 

1 

® 

O 

' 

i 

r 

r 

r^ 

000-0924 014 

-1 

• 

• 

r• 

r 

•r 

r 

• r 

e r 

a 100 -le •LJ -1a 41 as 0.f ld LS, 1-0 

Conti% Itarilte 

CETISW V1.12rev1 Analyst L- Approval: 

r 

1 

. 

—78—


Comparisons: Paile3of 9 

Report Data: 18 JuW6 3.0.5 PM 

Analysis: 013057.60168154206ps0 

Plant Bioassay - C hronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type SampleUnk Co ntrol Link Dste Analysed Version 

Average Length (mm) Compa rison 16-3653.4731 163653 .4731 18 Jtd-06 3:05 PM CETISr1.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untraroformed 11100 >100 1 WA 24.5216 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P•Valus MSD Dectslon(0.05) 

Artifi cial SoalSedi 100 1.02703 1.85955 0.1672 30.563 NonSgnifiant Effe ct 

ANOVATable 

Sou rce Sum of Squares Mean Squa reOF F StatisticP-Value Deelslon(0.05) 

Between 712330 712.336 1 1.05 M33445 Nom•Si9ni0antE6ea 

Error 540264 • 675M 8 

Total 6114.97565 1387.865 9 

ANOVAAssumpt ors 

Attribute Ted Statistic Critical P-Value D•cfaton(0.01 

Variances Variance Rat io F 1.12363 21 15450 0.74048 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.96684 0.87988 • Normal Distribu tion 

Data Summary Original Daft Transformed Data 

Conc-% Control rype Count Mean MINmum Maximum- SD Merl Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar ti ficial SOWS 5 124.62 818 1532 '211,167 

700 5 107.74 87.6 148 23.607 

Graphics 

_ 

+ 1 

1 i 

s 1 

^ 

S 1 

1 

1 

0 

1 

1 • 

1 

1 x 

1 , 

s 100 La •13 •1a Os 00 OS Ice >s 1d 

Ca % • aanWts 

000 .092.1014 CETISM V1.1210A Analyst 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1



Report Dots: 18 Jui-08 3A5 PM 

Analysis: 0"937.32MIS4206psB 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH21A Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Uric Date Analysed Verston 

Average AG WI(Wel, mg) Compartsort 1838534731 163653.4731 18JUW63:05PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Daft Tronsfortn Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untranalolmsd 1100 >100 1 WA 44.89% 


NOWN 

Control vs Cons% Statistic Critical P Vslw MSD Dedsion(0. 

Aomal SOWS00 100 022571 1.85955 OA135 28.689 Nan•Signifo m EBed 

ANOVATsbla 

Sources Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P Vslw Decision(0.05) 

Between 30.31542 30.31542 1 0.05 0.82709 NonSiOnifrant Effect 

EM 4760.421 595.0527 8 

Total 4790.73680 625.36809 9 

ANOVAAssumptions I 

Attribute Test StNbtle CrltMa) P•V•Iw D•dston(C.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 3.88029 23.15450 023489 Equal Varlances 

Dtstribu5on Shaplro-WiikW 0.69548 0.19531 Normal Distribution 


Conn% Control Typo Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 


100 5 60.421 36.58 110.67 30.591 

Gmphlos 

d 

l 

i 

l ' • 

1 1 

r 

1 

0 

• o 


- corg.% 

• 

I 

I 

- 1 

•I 

1 

1 

I 

• I 

•La -Id •LO •Oa 0.0 [U 1A l.a 

Rantns. 

000-092-1014 CETISr vl.12revl Analyst: .}" Approvak 

• 

• 

1 

- 

>4 

-80-



Report Date: 18 Jul-W 3•.05 PM 

Anab sis: 17-g077-01351B754206psS 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic C112M HW 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link ControlUnk DateAnalyced Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 164653.4731 1838534731 18 JuWG 3:05 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Urrtranalormd 11100 moo 1 WA 33.039E 


Control vs Cone.Y. Statistic Cr81cat P-Value MSD Deciaion(O.O 

Artificial SoUSedl 100 1.53523 1.55955 0.0818 4.15398 Non-SlpnMcant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Vslus tkclsion(0,0 

Between 29.40357 29.40357 1 236 0.18328 Non-Significant Effect 

Error 99.80294 12A7537 8 

Total 129208511 41.878M 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Value Decislon(0.01) 

Vananoes Variance Ratio F 10.51840 23.15150 OJ4261 Equal Vaflanoss 

Distribullon Shap4o-Wilk W 0.95529 o.73115 Normal Distribution 


Conc-•.E Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximwn SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SONS 5 12.351 7.9275 19276 4.7733 

100 5 8.9213 7.108 10.587 IA715 

Graphics 

1 i 

1 

z 

•1 

• • 1 1 

1 

1 

, 

• 1 

1 

0 m 

Lo 

0 

CelleT'h 

100 .10 d3 -13 4L5 ae us 14 13 

000-092.101-1 CETIS" vl.1.2revl Analyst 3^' Approval: 

Pallllib



Report Date: 18 Ju406 3:03 PM 

Analysis: 104892.32MI54206psB 

PI 13-10 ssay-Chronic CH2MHal 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Dats Analysed Version 

Average Root WL (wet, mg) Comparison 183653.4731 1638534731 18 Jul•08 395 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform ZMa NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Variance t TwoSampie C % T Untransformed 100 ,100 1 NIA 37.75% 


Control vs. Conn% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Doclslon(0.05) 

ArWkU SoWSed 100 1.24804 1.855$ 0.1237 42.7472 Non•SIpnUKant Ef ct 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DP P Statistic P Value Dadslon(0.05) 

Between 2057.758 2057.758 1 1.56 0.24731 Non•SigNBrant Effect 

Error 10368.92 . 1321.115 a 

Total 12628.8821 3378.8738 9 

ANOVAAssuinptlons 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decssion(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio P 6.72930 23.15450 0.09177 Equal Variances 

DAslrtbuson Shapiro-Wdk w 0.94554 0.61018 Normal Dis"WtIon 

Dots Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Moan Minimum Maxknum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 113.23 51.538 15&52 47.802 

100 5 84.544 64.510 103.58 18A89 

Graphics 

1 

t 1 • 

1• 

t •1 

t 

19 • 1 

1 

1 

< 

• 1 

11 

333 

1 

i • 

1 

• 1I 

0. 1 

1 

0 

0 100 30 -LS -1a -0S Oa 0; U 1.f to 

t:oao'h RsokkS 

000*92-101-1 CETISw vl.1.2roA Amlalyst 2 AppOVah 

1 

1


Comparisons: Pa"70f 9 


Analysis: 134344-135518154206psB 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Ana4TUTypo SamploUnk ConlrolUnk Date Analyzed Ve rs ion 

Average Root Wt (OM m9) Comparison 1648534731 1636534731 18 JuWB 345 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta H NOEL LO EL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal VailancelTwoSample C>T Unbanslonned 11100 >100 1 NA 45.34% 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Cri tica l P-Value MSD DeCWW(0.05) 

Artificial Sol/W 100 1.42859 1.85955 0.0955 3ZW58 NonSlg tmt Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareDF F Statistic P•Vatue Dedsion(0.05) 

Between 18.76904 18.76904 1 2.04 0.19098 NonSlgnifkant Effect 

Error 73.573 9.196625 8 

Total 923420410 27.965688 9 


Attribute Test Shetistle Critical P Valve D•cblon(0.01) 

Variances Varience Redo F 16.97948 23.15450 0.01787 Equal Variances 

DWrbudon Shapiro-WA W 0.90304 023651 Normal Distribution 

Dsta Sunmary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cony. Conbol7ype Count Mean Mlnlmman Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 


100 5 5.1266 3.9520 624 14114 

Graphics 

Lo 

m 

0. 1 

ar 

M 

a UO 

ccnr % 

• , 

-zs -u -ta iS oa os u u 

aara,xs 

-83- 

000-092-101.1 CETIS n'vt.12rev1 AnalysC '7 _ Approval•__ 

i 

m 

m 

m 

m 

u


Comparisons: Papa S of 9 

Report Date: 1B JW-083.05 PM 

Analysis: 07-136041408754206psB 

Plant Sioassair - Chronic CHLY Hill 


Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Comparison 16396534731 1636834731 18 Ail-W 3:05 PM CEfISV1.1.2 

Method Alt H DataTranstorm Zee LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two4ample C>T Un transbmred 11100 >100 1 WA 34.63% 


Controlvs ConrJ,G St at istic Cri ti cal P-Value MSD Decislon(O.D 

ArliBolal So9lSedt 100 0.96975 1.85956 0.1003 61.6913 Nat-SkOnc,ant E1(ed 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Stat is tic P Value Dedsion(0.03) 

Between 2587.601 2587.601 1 0.94 0.36057 Nan%WlicantEffect 

Error 220122 2751.524 8 

Total 245NJ961 8339.1252 9 

/NOVA Assump tions 

Attribute Test Statistic C rit" P Velu• Deciston(0.01) 

Variances Variance RadaF 1.61984 23.15480 0.65173 EqualVariarms 

Distribu tion ShaplroWilk W 0.94404 0.59876 Normal Dlabibu tion 

Dab Summary Odgbul Data Transformed Dab 

Cone.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimaan . Maximum SD 

0 Arti0delsows 8 177.14 93.113 240.80 88.331 

100 3 144.97 101.89 208.61 48.632 

Graphics . 

t 

^ t 

t^ 

t 

B 

a 

r 

r• 

• 

t 

0 

r 

a • • 

r 

r 

r 

• • r 

o too ^ as -u .ty as as ors t.o is 1-0 

Cow% aarerns 

tloo-092-101-1 CETIS^ V7.1.2revl Analyst 2y" Approval: -84- 

r rr


Plant Bioassay-Chron ic 

Comparisons: . Pape 9 of 9 

Report Data•. 18 Jul•OB 3:05 PM 

Anslyslc: 064394.499318l54206ps l3 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sam ple Link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Dry, rng) Comparison 164653.4731 16-MS4731 18 J" 305 PM CETiSv1.12 

Method Alt H Dots Transform Zato NOEL LOEL Toxic Un its ChV PMSD 

Equal VarlancetTWOSample C>T Uftansformed 11100 >100 1 WA 37.33% 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Decislon(0.05) 

ArUft l SoBlSedl 100 1.52028 1.85955 0.0835 7.54637 NonSirfli ant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Sou rce Sum of Squares Mean SquareDF F StatisticP Value Doetslon(0.05) 

Between 95.15679 95.15679 1 2.31 0.18893 Mon-SlprvficantEflaU 

Error 329.3709 41.17199. 6 

TOW 424.532677 136.32878 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Cr it ical P•Valuo t)eclelon(0.01) 


awbubon Shapiro-Wnk W 0.91804 0.34089 Normal Dis tribution 


Conc-1G ControlT • Count Mean Minlmum Maxmum SD Moon Minknum Maximum SD 

0 ArO6daISGWS 5 2D217 12.223 33384 &8117 

100 S 14.048 1lzu 1 5.850 21673 

Graphics 

^ t r r 

1 r r 

r 

r r • 

1 r r• 

r 1 r 

a 

s -- ----- __- --- ----°-°- 

r 

^ ir rrrr 

o loo - •rd •u -1a es oa os >0 13 ss 

Cone-% - RMICHS 

r 

CH2M Hill 

-85- 

000-092-101-1 CETISw v1.12revl Analyst_ Approval:_

140.1. rorr,.. 

M1yATMA 

WpbY. 

Rw1wMC 

RwawwD 

RAOI a 

Mwww ahem"wa* 

cwawamaN! 

MwR Sa W.,7lt 

O^ Vmr+O 

Dwc.amagwwAxa 

A- A 

- R" 

R4pt4M C ` 

s 

1n a W ft aw ff ò 

kC> 

BLUEGRASS GROWINTEST 

C6* HIM" RlaJw1 Tw-vw w 0vmccO 

as E25Ti0l'sm b J 

. awoaawR^Mlw ^^^ .H 

IW. I raAnrosr- tiara POaT• 

CON C. RRRMCATa .Nanaeca aMagwj" &alpaca 

c>zamw,aNJl+ 

Iwo lHOaa aw 3, Dam N*M 

qM.+d 


A S 

s 3 —r 

c I l it a ^. 

e S 1 3 3 

ror.ae.lr...a..^s aWLMIyIYÔSnYaDîp^1MMtIM.MwdrgQ OwMYmlapy^we{ 

Rw0laA 

RyblaG ^ /•G.L^/r ^' 1 5^...,J! rx G 444 ^ a ^/^ 

RwwRYD i.a.. ^ 1 O t I 

Rwnra 3 mLuJVr.. 1.. S_1-AEG_ ^ ^c..A.l ^r^-- 

Mw ,ftd MrpR 

Lwow a0 

U4 R wlwa 

Ibpwl mc0 

ThT w1 ww vn w1 

IJS2)2 .O trim. h 

l 12 

c t l o Q. s ozr, 

0 022.0 ZQ• 1 

E l2 ti .3 

^•^ 

EM-MMURIMEOW noO^^ 

7b TNawt wa" ft 

Rr A to .(0 1 Iq • 2 1 MI . 2L 

s .3 I l — 

= 2D 171. !0(i . 

1 1wc.z ou 

I' 

4_444.._- .....^,...► 

• 

"a. 

we +aa am 

p, 

Ô LJ 

i 

Y 

—86—



Repo rt Date.. 18 JuWO 3:18 PM 

Test Unit: 04.Mli-22991815017psB 

Pla nt 8loasssy • Ctronlc CN2M Nit 

Test No: 12.6229.3369 Test Type: P1ant0mic Dunflon: WA 

Sta rt Date: 25 Jan-08 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Speci es : Poe sandbergil 

Ending Date: Dg Water. Source: 

Setup Date: 25 Jan -05 8rtne: 

Comments: recalculated Height and Length data July I k 2008 

Sample No: 05.1608.3151 Code: 81542-07 Mont 

Sample Date: 21 Nov-05 Material: Soo Project: 

Rece ive Date: Source: Hanford 


Comments: J1MW. E267701 


Analysis EndpointNOEL LOEL ChV PMSD Method 

07-1683-e743 %Gemdnation 100 > 100 WA 29.15% Equal Va tarim t TW*SanVM 

05-98656166 Average Height (mm) 100 > too WA 21.669E Equal Variance tTwo.4ample 

11-1712-0856 Average length (mm) 1D0 WA 4 5.02% Equal Variance lTwoSampis 

07.3121 .1221 Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) 1D0 > 100 WA 4028% Equal Va riance It Tvf>Sample 

01.19996693 Ave ra ge Root Wt. (Wet mg 1D0 > 100 WA 61.63% Equal Va ri ance It TMoSample 

11.1044.3630 Average Root Wt (Dry. mg) 100 >1D0 WA 5559% Equal Valance ITwo-Sample 

103874-4783 Average Total Wt (Wet, mg 100 > 100 WA 55.04% Equal Valance tTwo-Sample 

0965404099 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 1D0 WA 45A1% Equal Varian ce tTMaSampk 

_87_ 

000-092.101. 1 CSv1.12rev1 ETi1tl 

Analyst ^" Approral: 

.

MIS Test Summary 


Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Arti5dal SOUS 5 0.88000 0.60000 1.00000 0.08000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.78000 OA0000 1.00000 Omen 026077 3431% 

Avenge Height (mm) Summary 


0 Artificial SOWS 5 45.68 36.700 55.8 =95 7.5344 16.49% 

100 5 41.47 28.5 54 4.1819 9.3510 2255% 

Average Length (mm) Summa ry 

Cone/. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 


100 5 80.92 64 1027 6.3838 14.23 17.89% 



0 Arta trial SOWS 5 63.903 41A75 82.338 7.1313 15.946 24.95% 

100 5 76.858 32385 123.58 14.88 33272 4329% 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mW Summary 

Cone-/. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 12.351 7.9275 19276 21347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 14.659 10.595 19.1D5 1.8121 3.8047 26.59% 


Cone% Controln" Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 


100 5 123.91 37.985 22528 30.793 66.855 55.57% 

Ave" Root WL (Dry. mg) Summary 


0 Artificial SoiUS 5 7.8668 3.78 14.108 1.8639 4,1675 52.95% 

100 5 9.1010 8A65 13.887 1.4338 32081 3523% 


Cone-% ContrWType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 ArliSdal SOWS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 , MOBS 58.331 32.93% 

100 5 200.76 70.37 349.96 45.485 101.71 50.66% 


Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maxknum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 20.217 12223 33AN 3.9407 8.8117 43.58% 

100 5 23.76 17.060 32.992 29738 6.6492 27.98% 



Test LILAC: 04$263-2299/B/54207psB 

000-092.101-1 CETiSW v1.122ev1 Anatyst_Zm 

A{pmvW 

-88-



ConaY. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Ar55dal SONS 1.00000 1.00000 1J)


Compa risons: Pape 1 of 9 


Analysis: 

07-16OU34318154207ps8 

Plant Bloassay • Chronic CH2 101 Hill 

Endpoint AnaWs Type Sample Link Control Link Dab Anaryxed Version 

%Germination Compa ri son 04$283.2206 04-02832206 18Jul-083:14PM CETISV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Twric Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Anpular(Correct ed) 100 >100 1. WA 26.15% 


Control vs cone-,/* Statistic Cri ti cal P-Value 1tISO Decisiom(0.06) 

Artifi cialSoIVSedi 100 0.63103 1.85955 02150 028562 Non-SWfloantEffe ct 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P•Value Dedslon(0.oe) 

Between 0.0438344 0.043634 1 0.69 0.43008 Non-SWkent Effect 

Error 0.5054631 0.063183 8 

Total 0.54909750 0.1068173 8 


Attribute Test Statistic Cri tical P Valor Deeision(0.01) 


Dlatributfon ShapYOWak W 0.90703 026121 Normal Distribution 

Daft Summa ry 

Orl*al Data Transformed Dab 

Con" Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artifi cial SdVS 5 0.88000 0.60000 1J)0000 0.17869 120581 0.08808 1.34528 020835 

100 S 0.76DDO 0.40000 1.00000 020077 1.07370 0.68472 1.34528 M28946 

Graphics 

•^ oa 

a m 

r • • 

r 

r 

; • • 

0.1 r 

------------- r -------------- 

tip 

iF Al 1 

0. i 

W 

0.1 

ao 

• 

s 

Cono9s 

-0 

a 

too as -u -1a •o.s tie oa LO u 

000.092.101-1 CETIS^'v1.12rev1 Analyst a Approval. 

1 

1 

I 

1 

aaekks 

td 

-90-



Report Dale: 18 Jul-08 3:18 PM 

Analysis: 05-9866.5166IS154207pSB 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic 

CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Semple Link Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Height(mm) Compar is on 04.8263,2298 04.8263-2299 18Jul-063:19PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Unlrarnaformsd 11 100 >100 1 NIA 21.86% 

Grob Comparisons 

Control vs Cono-Y. Statistic Critical P•Valus MSD Dectslon(0.05) 

Artificial SOWS" 100 0.78392 1.85955 02278 9.90062 Non-Si9nOrant Effect 

ANOVATabte 

Sourer Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic PAfalua Dscialon(0.05) 

Between 4431025 4421025 1 0.61 0.45567 Nan-Sigrur"m Effect 

Error 576238 72.1045 a 

Total 621.146244 11OA1475 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P•Val" Decfalon(a.01 


Distilbution Shapiro•wlk W 0.97738 0.94947 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary original Daft Transformed Data 

Conti/. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ardfatal SOWS 5 45.68 38.7 55.8 75344 

100 5' 41.47 285 54 93510 

Graphic 

so IF 

Ij 

5 9 S I 1 1 

7 

2 edlQ 

s 0 

3 

e 

0 

Con.% 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 1 11 

. 1 

•n 

1 

1 

1 

1 

z 

•1 

WO •1.0 •li •LO -0.f OA 03 14 13 

000.092-101-1 CEnS TM VIA2revl Anayst: Approval: 

aanYib 

U 

-91-



Report Dale: 18 J"3.14 PM 

Analysis: 11.1712.0855IB754204a8 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unit Link Data Analysed Version 

Average Length 0tm) Cornparlaon 04-8263.2299 04$203.2299 18JUF08 3:14 PM CET1SV1.12 


Equal Variance t Two•Sampte C>T Untranstomrod cloo 100 WA 21.06% 


Control vs Conc-% Sta ti 

stic Critical P-Vdu• MSD Decision(0.05) 

Artificial SoUfSedl 100 3.09648 1.85955 0.0074 262433 Significant Effect 

ANOVA Tabis 

Source Sum of Squarsa Mean Square OF F Sta tistic P Valu• Decislon(0.05) 


Er ro r 3981438 497.9294 8 

Total 8757.66064 5272.1545 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Criti ca Varfamces Va 

l P-Vslus Deeision(OA1) 

ri ance Ra ti 

o F 3.91814 23.15450 0.21443 Equal Vriances 

Dis tribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.96138 0.80147 Normal DlstlbuSm 

Date Summary Original Data Transformed oats 

Cony. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean M inimum Maximum SD 

0 Artfidal SOWS 5 124.62 89.8 153.2 '• 28.167 

100 5 80.92 64 1027 1423 

Graphics 

l 1 

l i 

1^ 

1 

1 

• 

1 I 

1 

1 1 

I 1 



0 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

0 100 -1.0 •13 •LO •O.a Oa OS >A is SA 

Coat-% lueidt, 

000-092-101.1 CETISTM v1.12re viAnalyst— f", Approval: . 

-92-


Comparisons: Page of 9 


Analysis: 14-2807.&W/3154207psB 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CHZM HAI 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sample Link Controllink DateArvalyzed Version 

Ave" AG Wt (Wei, mg) Compar ison 0482832299 044283.2299 18 JuWS 314 PM CETISW.12 

Method Alt N Data Transform Zsta NOEL LOEL Toxic UnitsCw PMSD 

Equal Vadanoe t Tw o-Sampla C> T Untransfarmed 100 ).too 1 WA 4&12% 


Control vs COnc-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Decislonl0.05) 

ArOcIal SoilrSedl 100 -0.785 1.85955 0.7723 30.6833 NonSlgnificanl Ef ed 

ANOVATabte 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa re DF F Statistic P Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 419Al25 419AI25 1 0.62 OA5508 Non-SW"nt Effect 

Enor 5445.28 680.68 8 

Total 5864.69229 1100.0725 9 

ANOVAAssump tlons 

Aelribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decblon(0.01) 

Va riances Variance Ra tio F 4.35362 2315450 0.18327 Equal Variances 

Dis trbuson Shapiro-Wilk W 0.97222 091060 Normal Dlsbbu tion 


Cone=/6Cont ro l Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Man Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 63.903 41A73 82.338 15.946 

100 5 76.8% 32.383 123.58 33.272 

Gmphles 

i • 

^q B 1 

r 

40, 

1I 

1 

1 

l $ 1 • 

^ i jaLj 1 • 

•1 

0 

. 0 

Conc-d. 

- • 1 

no -7A -14 -Le 45 00 eA 1.0 1A 

• -93- 

000.092.101.1 CETIS"r V1.12revl • Analyst: j" Approval: 

• 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Wlklts 

7d


Comparlsonat Page 5 of 9 

Report Date: 16 Jul.N 3:14 PM 

Analysts: 97.7121-122118154207psB 

Plant Bioassay. Chrordc CH2M H01 

Endpoint AnalysisTyps SampNUnk ConUdUnk DatsAnslyrsd Ve rsion 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) compa rison 04.6263-2299 04.8263,2299 16 Jul-06 3:14 PM CE71Sv1.t.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta FFNOFL LO FIL Tonle Untie ChV PMSD- 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untranebrmed 11100 >100 1 WA 4028% 


Control vs Cone-% Sta ti stic Critical - P•Valus MSD Daeislon(O.OS) 

Ar ti ficial SoIVSedI 100 -0.8626 1.65955 03933 4.97430 Non.SigNllont Effect 

ANOVATable 

SourceSum of Squares Mean SquareDF F Statistic P-Value Deotsiml(0.05) 

Between 13.318" 13.31844 1 0.74 OA1334 Non-Significant Effect 

Error 143.1132 17.86915 a 

Total 15&431646 31207592 9 


Attribute Teat Statis tic Crldral P-Value Decislon(O.ot) 

Variances Va riance Ratio F J 1.75351 2115450 0.59917 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiromik W 0.91217 - 029621 Non" Mtribution 


Cone.% Control Typs Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar tificial SOWS & 12.351 7.9275 . 19276 4.7733 

100 5 • 14.659 10.595 19.105 3.6047 

Graphic 

r ^ 

t ' • 

r 

t r 

r 

r 

t 

' 

Y 

t 

' 

^^ 

r 

^^ r 

^ . r r 

• r 

r 

o ' 

o 

too -w -ts •LO as m as to is 

cono-% 

000-092-101.1 CETISw VI.1.2revt AnalystZ 

r 

aanldte 

u



RelwA Data: 18 Jul-W 3:14 PM 

Analysis: 01.1999-8W3fBl54207psB 

PIaM Bioassay . Chronic CH2 111 Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Co nt 

rol Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root Wt. (Wet, m9) Comparison 04-0263.2299 04.8263-2299 1SJul-083.•14PM CEnSv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C > T Untransfonned 100 >100 1 WA 81.63% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P-Valve MSD Deeislon(0.05) 

ArtiWal Solnedl 100 -02844 1.85956 0.6063 69.7838 Non•SipnMant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P Valve Decision(0.05) 

Between 284.5931 284.6931 1 0.08 0.78336 Non-SWOfanl Effe ct 

Error 26165.79 3520.723 8 

Total 25450.4782 3805.4162 9 

ANOVAAssump tions 

Attribute Test Statistic Criti cal P-Value Decislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Rado F 2.06099 23.15450 0.50090 Equal Varlanrm 

Distribution Shapko-Wilk W 0.98045 0.96755 Normal Distribution 

Data Summa ry 

Original Data Transformed Data 

Conc-% Control TypeCount Mean Minimum Maximum $D Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 ArtifKW SOWS 5 11323 51.638 158.52 47.062 

100 5 123.91 37.985 226.36 68.856 

Graphic 

t r 

a 

1 

r 

r 

r 

1 8 t 

r 

i • 

r 

1 

^ i • 

1 

r 

r• 

e 1 

e us as •u •1a as c os 1a u 1a 

COW-% Rae1dN 

000-092.1014 CETISTKv1.1.2revl Ana"I b— Approval; 

r 

r 

r 

-95-


Compa risons: P307019 

Repo rt 

Date: 1aJul-083:14PM 

Anslysis: 11.1044.3638rB1542 07psS 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Daft Analyzed Ve rs ion 

Average Root WL (thy, m(i) Cornparison 04-0283.2299. 04.8263-2299 18 Ju406 3141 PM CETISv1.12 

Method AN N Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Tole Un its ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T UnlransfomaC 1100 >100 1 WA 55.599E 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P•V•lu• MSD Decis lon(0.05) 

Ar tificial SoWSedl 100 -0.5249 1.86965 0.0931 4.37287 NonSgNBcent Effect 

ANOVATabls - 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P-Value Deciston(O.05) 

Between 3AM574 3.8119574 - 1 028 0.61388 Non-Signifiwnl Effect 

Error 110.5981 13.82476 a 

Total 114.407681 17.634337 9 


Anribute Teal Statistic Critical P-Value Dectslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ral lo F 1.68983 23.15450 0.62375 Equal Var iances 

Distribu tion Shap(ro-WAk W 0.92375 0.38925 Normal DisfrWon 

Data Summary Original D ata Transformed Data 

Cone-`.E Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 AtO fictal SONS 5 7.8668 3.78 14.108 mtin 

1DO 5 9.1010 SAM 13.888 32061 

Graphic 

0 

r • 

OJ r 

r 

• 

0. 

0.6 ^ r • 

• CIS r 

s 

at 

oa ' 

o 

rao 

•zs •u -LO as oa os u u 

Caro- iY 

ODD-W2-101-1 CETISM V1.12rovl Analyst Approval: 

• 

i 

•r 

i 

RKAft 

Lo 

.-96-


Comparisons: Page so( 9 

Report Date: 18 JuM 3:14 PM 

Analysis: 10-3674-47B31B154207p38 

Plant ploss5ey • Chronic MUM HiY 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unit Link Daft Analyzed Ve rs ion 

Average TOW Wt (We%mg) CompWson 04-8263.2299 04.8283.2299 1BJ"3:14PM CETISvl.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zola NOEL LOEL Toxic units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Unbanalamed 11100 >100 1 WA 55.04% 


Control va Cono•% Statistic Critical p Value Ia50 Decislon(0.05) 

Ar08dal SoWSad 100 44505 1.85955 0.8879 97.5044 NOn-SlgW"nt Effort 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squa re @ Mean Square DF F Statistic P Valve Dscision(0.05) 

Between 1395204 1395.204 1 020 0.68428 NonSigN =t Effort 

Error 54957A9 6873.438 B 

Told 58382.6920 6288.6398 9 


Attribute Test Statistic critical P Vatue Dsclelor)(0.01) 

Variances Verb Ratio F 3.04021 2315450 0.30892 Equal Variances 

DistMulion Shapiro-VOkw 0.98099 0.97023 Nonrad Distribution 

Data S urnmary Original Data Transformed Data 

COWA Control Type Cou ntMean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum 30 

0 Artifi cial[ SOWS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 5 11.331 

100 5 200.78 70.37 349.98 101.71 

Graphics 

1 1 

1 

• 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

^ 1 

r $ i • 

F / p ^------ ^ ^--- ------------- 

1 

1 

1 

< 1 

1 

0 

0 100 -la •1S 44 43 04 z is 17 1.0 

000.092.101-1 . CETISM%1.12mvl Analyst"` Approval 

.1 

1 

r 

_97_


Compa ri 

sons.- 

Report Date•. 


181AM &14 PM 

Analysis: 09.9540-809WS154207psB 

Pant Bioas say -Chronlc C112M HUI 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Date Analyzed Ve rsion 

Average Total Wt (Dry, m ill Compa ri 

son 04412532209 04.8283.2299 18 Jul-08 3:14 PM CEnSv1.12 


Equal Variance t Two-Samp isC>T Unharadom»d 100 >100 1 WA 45A1% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistio Critical P-Value MSD De cts)on(&05) 

Ar tincial SoWSedl 100 -0.7178 1.85955 0.7533 9.15014 NonSIgni tant EBeli 

ANOVATable 

SourceSum of Squares Mean Squa reDF F Sta tistic: P Value DecWon(0.05) 

Between 31.37398 31.37390 1 031 0.49343 Nan-Significant Eftect 

Erna 487.4312 80.9289 8 

Total 51&505197 92.302885 9 


Attribute Teat Sta tistic CrRlul P V•lue Decislorl(0.01) 


Distribution Shapiro-Wik W 0.91351 0.30595 Normal Distribu tion 

Data Summary Original Data Trensfomled Dale 

Cone-% Control Type Court Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 ArOcIal SOWS 5 20.217 12223 33.384 8.8117 


Graph ics 

1 Is i 

1 

1 

, 

1 

• 

3 

1 

^ 

1 • 

1 1 1 • • 

r 1 

1 

0 

000-092.101.1 

• 1 

• 1 

• 1 

o No •ao -u •u 'as ao os to u u 

Cmc.% R&A is 

'-98- 

CETISTM v1.12reA . Analyst: .3— Approval: 

1

hAurA 

no. a 

ftvft .c 

Ra•uro 

Rsbr E 

ry. eaâ 

RiV,IaYA 

R^pler a 

arour c 

wo•ar o 

wo.or a 

Y..nw •k.+wM 

1^pAOrl 

11NY1• alml WN 


c..e aw" ft*d rr swoNt o,awoo• 

. kart oq•_'>-' nn u1Y ,7—M,._MU.l^.'ônn ^ • owl 2r- 

10- E26O MSM 2. OS 

S w.d• panirl•d (kya. DR 

PREtaeneaCE OWADO S •oer. 74MOPM. I %IDA»iOSF 

cenC FM% AT! (u Mr" 04 "0 rr e1Aaê! 

bwAGErC! 

PW"b* 

(u AM •.A.•r War.rr 

•r+a/ 

r ..3 30 owan0 

A 2- 3 iA 410 s 

100% • ag, ^ s S 

-7 -7 

O^Wppr 

Ap•cN. A 

ftv A a 

Lrorarc 

M"p 0 

ftp m a 

Nw.u. Warp! 

m . I'm 

M. Aer Wrp,t 

wvrne0 

co my 

,10 

N 7 n773-f3r 

TVMVK WN" Wl 

A 3 H31.0 oZ. 

• 0 't-5 %in't-5 % l 

l 03 `1Z 

. e l.'1 

0 00 )DR on 

a e Z .,l oSf'. s(o 

H 

•AT%AL rrW. 

(Oor,ad R'y,,,,m 

^]G 

lS {4p" 

-99-




TestUnlc 0S-1616-M7/B754208psB 

Plant Bioassay -Chronlc CH2M Nib 

Test No: 04.2827-7585 Test Type: Pla nt Chmrk Dontlon: WA 

Start Date: 25Jan-08 Protocol: ASTM E196M (2002) Species: Poa &Wx berg9 



Comments: recalculated Height and Length data Ju ly 18, 2008 

Sample No: 155450-5055 Code: B1542.05 Client: 

Samp le Dale: 28 Nov-05 Material: Sol project 

Receive Dais: Source: Hanford 


Comments: J10U5, E289701 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL Cw PMSD Method 

08.30988743 %Genninaem 100 31100 WA 23.35% WkoxonRw* Sum TwoSample 

174986.7382 Average AGWt(Wel, mg)100 31 100 WA 85.91% Equal VailencetTvoSarryde 

08-3301.7719 Average AG Wt (DM mg) 100 > 100 WA 55.97% Equal Varlance tT o-Sample 

09.15196887 Average Root WL (Wet mg 100 > 100 WA 72.60% Equal Variance 11Wo-SartpN 

19.1974 -3646 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 N/A 5248% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

01-SWB-0233 Average Total Wt (Wet mg 100 > 100 WA 74.97% Equal Varian ce lTwoSample 

07-1829.7693 Average Tot al Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 5288% Equal Variance t TwoSample 

% Germina tion Summary . . 

Cone y. Control Typo Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOUS 5 0.68000 0.60000 1.00000 0.08000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.92000 0.50000 1.00000 MOWDO 0.17889 19.44% 


Cono-% Control Typo Reps Mean Minimum Maximurn SE SD CV 


100 5 78.309 1 6.504 17227 28.648 64.058 81.80% 

Avenge AG Wt (Dry, mg) Summery 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Mi nimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 AA&W SOUS 5 12251 7.9275 19.276 2.1347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 .10.963 2.788 19.076 3.0434 &8052 62.08% 

Avenge Root WL (Wet, mg) Summary 

Conc-% Control Type Reps Mean MlnMwm Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artiildal SOUS 5 11313 51.538 158.52 21.449 47.9432 42.36% 

100 5 127.49 1&638 236.01 3&654 8&433 67.79% 

Avenge Root WL (Dry, mg) Summery 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Mi nimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 7.8668 3.78 14.108 1.8639 4.1678 52.98% 

100 5 5.3735 1.522 &0380 12083 2.6973 50.20% 

Avenge Total Wt (Wet mg) Summary 

Cone.% ControlReps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOUS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 26.086 5&331 32.93% 

100 5 20&80 32142 40827 66.483 148.66 7213% 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mg) Summe ry 

Conc.% Control Type Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 ArWkial SOWS 5 20.217 12123 33.364 3.9407 8.8117 . 43.68% 

100 5 1&336 4.3080 27.114 4.1865 9.3612 57.30% 

-100- 

000-092-101-1 CETISw v1.1.2evi Analyst: ' ^ Approval.,,__


% Germination Detag 

Conc=h Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SoiIIS 1.00000 1.00D00 1.00000 0.6M OJ30000 

1DO 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.80000 IDM 


Conc•% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 ArtiBdai SOWS 872900 55.1800 82338 73.2233 41.4750 

100 58.13 18.504 112882 31.7833 172.268 


Conold Control Type Rep t Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 AMWW SOWS 15.1720 10.552 19.270 8.82888 7.92751 

100 10.402 2786 18.3780 6.17334 19.0780 

Average RootWL (Wok mg) Detag 

Conc•% Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Areedal Soa18 143.362 140.624 155.524 720233 51.6375 

100 927300 15.638 189334 103.767 23&005 


Cones% Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 - 

0 AM"SolVS &75601 8.39399 1A708 3.77999 4295 

1DO 4.33401 1.522 7.83000 5.14333 8.03800 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Detail 

Cone-1,G Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Ar88dal SoIVS 210.852 195.814 240.852 145.247 93.1125 

1DO 150.88 32.142 302.195 135550 408274 

Average Total Wt Pry, mg) Detail 

Cones% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArUBdal SOWS 23.9280 18.948 33.384 128088 12.2225 

100 14.7360 4.30801 242060 113167 27.1140 

Pepe 2 of 2 

Report Data: 18 Jul-06 322 PM 

Test Link: 08.161 "73718154208pe8 

3- 

000.092.101.1 CETISMV1.122eA Analyst 

Approval: 

-101


Plant Bloassay _ Clxonic 



Analysis: 05-3096'07431BI53208psB 


%GenNnaBOn Comparison 08-16183737 08.1816.5737 18JLkN3:22PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta JFNOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Wllcoxon Rank Sum Two-Semple C > T Rank 11100 >100 1 WA 23.35% 


Control vs Conn% Statistic Critical P Value Ties DsNsion(0.05) 

ArUcial SolllSed 100 29.5 0.5794 3 NonSlgnificard Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P-Value DecWon(0.05) 

Between 0.0056708 0.005671 1 0.13 0.72399 NonSlgrificant.Eftect 

Error 0.3390172 0.042377 8 

TOW 0.34468000 0.0480479 9 

AH)VA Assumptions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Value Deonlon(0.01) 

Variances VarWm Ratio F 1.00963 23.15450 0.99281 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiro-WUcW 0.71659 0.00140 NanalormalOistriblrtion 


CHZM Hill 

Conn% Con tr ol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SONS 5 0.88000 0.60000 140000 0.17889 510000 1 -50000 7.00ODg 2.65518 

100 S 0.92000 0.60000 1.00000 0.17689 590000 1.50000 7.00000 2A5967 

Graphic 

rdpaj 

t 

Hs 

a* 

_I-- 

__________°-- 

-- 

as 

1 

1 • •' • 

1 

1 

1 

1 

.1 1 

1 

1 

• 1 1 

1 

0.1 • 1 

• 1 

as 

a 100 4A -LS -LO -U ale as La LS to 

C•nc.% tnroun 

-102- 

004092-101-1 CEnS-vt.i2rsd Amyst_Z-_-_ Approval: 

• 

i1 

1


Plant Blosssay- Chronic 


Report Date: 18 J" 322 PM 

Analysis: 1749W 382 15420803 

Endpoint Anaiyals Typs Sample Link Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Wei, mg) Comparison 0&16184737 09.16164737 19 Jul•08 322 PM CETISVI.IZ 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zefa NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C)- T Untransformed 11100 3-100 1 WA 95.91% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P Valus MSD Dec9sbn(0.05) 

Artrficial Sd1ISedl 100 -0A89 1.85955 0.6807 54.8978 NonSigntOwnt Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Sq ua re DF F Statistic P Value Dectsion(0.05) 

Between 518.847 518.847 1 024 0.63866 NonSignlficant Effed 

Error 17431.01 217&577 S 

Total 17949.867 2897.723!1 9 

ANOVAAesUmptioru 

Attributs Test Statistic Critical P•Value Deeision(o.01) 

Variances Verianos Ratio F 16.13761 23.15450 0.01963 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.95324 0.70659 NomuJ Distibution 

Data Summary Original Data Transfomrod Data 

Cone-Y• Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 63.903 41.475 82,338 15.946 

100 5 78.309 16.504 17227 64.058 

Graphics 

z 

C 

S t 

1 

1 

t 1 

1 

t 1 

1 

1 $ i 

t 

B • 

e 

1 

t _ 1 

0 

1 

• 1 

• 1 

• 1 

0 100 •a.e •fS .t,p 43 0.0 OS to ld 1A 

corx % 

1 

1 

ea111Jb 

CH21111 Hill 

-103- 

000-092-101.1 CEfIS 1Y v1.12reA Analyst--. APprovat_



Report Dais: 18 AIM 3:22 PM 

Analysis: 0S-=I-7719I8154206ps8 

Plant Bioassay . Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unit Control Unk Dab Analysed Version 

Average AG Wt (DM m g) Cow 08-16165737 08.16163737 18 JuW63:22 PM CEnSv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform sets 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t TwoSampie C > T Untrernlormed 11100 >100 1 WA 55.979E 


Control vs Cono-9E Ststiatk Critical P Valve MSD Dedsion(0.05) 

Artificial SOVM11 100 0.37342 1.85955 0.3593 6.91265 NonSIgNBcent Effed 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square, OF F Statistic PValus Decision(0.05) 

Between 49174216 4.817485 1 0.14 imm No"ignlBcantEHect 

Error 276.3788 34.54735 8 

Total 281.19627 39.384834 9 

ANOVAAssurrlptions 

Attribute Test Statistic finial P.Valus Dechion(0.01) 


Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.94217 0.57742 Normal DisWjuOOn 

Dale Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cono-% Control Typo Count Mean Minimurn Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum $D 

0 Artificial Sd1/S 5 12.351 7.9273 19.276 4.7733 

100 5 10.963 2.786 19.076 48052 

Graphics l . 

rs 

Y 

t jo r r 

t 

r 

0. 

0 

' 

r 

r 

r 

r 

X.,.1 

a 100 • .ye is -is 44 0.0 Of W u 3a 

conPxr eanidts 

000-M-101.1 CEnSw v1.1.2eA M*zt a^- Appmwl: -104-


Comperkora: Page4of 7 

Report Dab: 18 Jul-06 322 PM 

Analysis: (&151g588TIB154208p3B 

Plant Bioassay. Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpoint 

Analysis 

Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analysed Version 

Average Rool WL (Wet, mg) Compadson 06.1616-5737 08-1618,5737 18JuW03:22PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform We NOEL LOEL Toxic UnitsChV PMSD 

Equal Variance It TboSanoe C>T (fntranaformed 11100 moo 1 WA 72.80% 


Control va Conc-SL Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dscislon(0.08) 

Artlflaal SoWSedl 100 -0.3228 1.85938 0.8224 822037 NonSi0Mfu2nt Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squre OF F Statistic P Value Desklon(0.05) 

Between 508.4237 50SA231 1 0.10 0.75527 NonSIWuliicant Effect 

Error 39083AS 4883.484 8 

Total 39592.2987 5390.9081 9 

ANOVAAsaumpllons 

Attribute Test Statistic critical P Value Deckion(C.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio P 324754 23.15450 02=7 Equal Var iances 

Oishibu llon Shaplm-Wilk W 0.97884 095867 Normal Distribution 


Conc-Y. Conlr ol Type Count Mean Minknum Madmum SO Mean Minimum Maalmum SD 

0 Artull" 5a0/S 5 11323 51.638 158.52 47.862 

100 5 127.49 15.638 230.01 SSA33 

Graphics 

^ 

1 

1 

too r rr 

I i 

1 'e 

0 

a 

Conc-% 

100 -0.0 -Ls -Le -0.f 04 0.5 U Ls 

• 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

aanaits 

000-0924 01-1 CETIS41v1.1.2rev) Analyst: 3 

0a 

—105— 

Approval:

CUIS Analysis Detail 

Comparisons: pap 5of 7 

Report Date: 16 JuW* 322 PM 

Analysts: 19.1974-W68154208psli 

Plant eloassay • Chronic CH2M HID 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Unk Control Unit Analyzed V er sion 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Comparison 04B-1616-ST37 08.1616.5737. 18 Jul-06 322 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untrarwbrmed 11100. >100 1 WA 5248% 

Group Comparlsoro 

Control vs Conn-% Statistic Critical P-Valor 11SO Deoision(0.05) 

ArtificialSOIVSed 1D0 1.12295 1.85955 0.1470 4.1285 Non-SIMIfianl Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value DeclslonM.05) 

Between 15.53922 15.53922 1 126 028403 NonSgnlnant Effect 

Error 9858252 12.32281 8 

Total 114.121741 27.862037 9 

ANOVAAssumptions- 

Attrtb to Test Statistic Critical P-Valor Declslon(0.01) 

Variances Vartarm Ra tio F 2.30753 23.15450 DA1996 Equal Variances 

DWAwbon Shapiro-Wilk W 0.94036 0.55702 Normal DiasDwticn 

Data Summary Original Data Trataiwmed Data 

Cone% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artindal SOBIS 5 7.8666 3.78 14.108 4.1678 

100 5 5.3735 1.522 8.038 L6973 

Graphic 

_ i 

• 

W 

r • 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

0 ............. r 

r 

< i 

r 

• 

r 

• r 

r 

• 

.............. 

44 r 

0 tag .ta -Ls -U -45 04 05 1.0 U L 

Cann% aaMb 

000-092-101.1 CETIS TM v1.12ev1 Analyst; 3" Approval: 

-106-


Comparisons: Pe0e6011 7 

Report Date: 18 JuM 322 PM 

Analysis: 01.8008-02 154208psB 

Plant Bloassay -Chronic CH21111 Hill] 

Endpolnt Analysis Type Sampla Unk Control Unk Date Ans" Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Comparison 08.1516-5737 08.16104737 18 JuW6 322 PM CETISvt.12 

Method AR H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untransformed 100 moo 1 WA 74.979E 


Control vs Conr.>•. Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Decision(0.05) 

AditWSOWSedi 100 -0A(114 1.65955 0.6507 132.804 NorSlgNflantEffect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Surn of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic PVslw Decisbn(0.05) - 

Between 2054.488 2054.468 1 0.15 0.69883 Non-Slgnifxanl Effect 

Error 102008.6 12751.07 8 

Total 104063.043 1480&558 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Vslus Decislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 6.495(18 23.15450 0.09731 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shaplro•WIlkW 0.96355 0.98135 Normal Distribution 


Conc-9: Control TV" Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 An&W SOiIIS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 58.331 

100 5 203.80 32.142 40&27 148.66 

Graphics 

F, 2W r 

r 

Be 

, 

a ------------- 

s .' 

r 

z 

s • 'r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

0 

o too -u -u -,a .ns as os u 13 • xA 

000-092-1014 -CETiS^ V1.1.7mvl Analyst:


Comparisons- Page 7 of 7 

Report Data: 18 Ju4•06 372 PM 

Analysis: 07-1829.76938154208p38 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH21A Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Semple Unk Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Total W I (Dry. m0) Comparison -08-1616-5737 08.16165737 18 Jul•Ot3 322 PM CETISv1.12 

Method All H Date Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CAV PMSO 

Equal Va riance It Two-Sample C>T Untramiomred 100 >100 1 WA 52.88% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Deelslon(0.05) 

Artificial SodlSedl 100 0.87808 1.85938 02b93 10.0913 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVATabte 

Sou rc e Sum of Squares Moen Square DF F St atisticP-Value De cislon(0.05) 

Between 37.66095 37.66098 1 OAS 0.51866 NonSWIlIcantEftect 

E rr or 661.1147 82.639M S 

Total 69&7757 120.3003 9 


A tt 

ribute Test 8ta0stic Critical P Value Deelslon(0.01) 


DISWUBOn Shapiro-Wilk W 0.94792 0.64398 Normal DlsMtxr tion 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Da ta 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Men Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial Soda 5 20217 12223 33.384 8.8117 

100 5 16.338 4.3080 27.114 9.3612 

Graphics 

1 t r 

g 1 

i r r r 

1 r 

r • 

s 1 

< 

e 

__ 

r 

r _ 

• r 

r 

^ r 

i 

• r 

r 

p 1a0 •2A dS eta -0.s ae O.s td Lf 1s- 

Ca -% IUNdts 

000-092-101-1 CETISsrv1.12revi ' Analyst 1 Approral: _1 a- 

r 

NOR

t`ti 

icgs roâA..PAde 

PAP w A 

Awe a 

wra.c 

A.Te:ro 

A.pcwa 

Naw+r.+en. 

M1MubA 

Awevra 

Aweor a 

Aweuro 

Aww a 

u.An erm^wi 

t+e•e e^m 


e+A+c Oqe—y>=,Dry1fy'ÔS^NÔg1S^DgttÔry^—jg_ 

co"r evnIrATa 

raax 

r RE-ewe 

(120:0e. 

pwtiq^ 

C mft o 

^jy .p to 

Dc E2e6JO7SOiT L•O 

BHeft 3r 

roar. r Ta reaA 

BuaAOr¢a alenenu 

dwV 

prTT^ 

arsav^r ewaer e,ee..r.. a......auw.rdn n.u,r rss.^.^^ 

1adAYS roar. 

eAmAOeACe 

ca"Ar 

p.wW 

s 

0 

1 3 

z 

1 3 

Z 1 

3 3 

1 

a 3 

Me AwlWgyt nT"M w awl wl 

We WVA4 RMNIAS A JlN. `\ 

o.errôeêov^t 

RReuYA 

e .8 ZA^f. o 

4^ J o 

6. zz. .Cfl 

e /^ f. 9Z 

W 

VVVA. r1N4 

OO MAC ^Vy w 

zy -Z,z 

aq*e B 

iwwc 

{ I=na& nxJd'Svs'^ °Y ^l' r1 ^.lrr 'f-L,n.. .+u.•^.»e[1 2, v..,,Al CYC_ 

Awts4 o 

Awadea 

Â i«p+e 

e.Grlwoo 

eA.Me Rwl wgyt 

roe.^ ô 

^^NNEr` MMER" 

n T v wdm m 

A I M9.2,0 I li 3'0, 

D 1102r.- 

' s 01 l - 

e3 

B oo .2l l2 - 

e 01 .3'7 1tt9 G RI 

ss ^d A /rte 6., 6vj 5^.^(r^,^, w ^ 2.410r6 

-109-



Report Data: 18.1" 3:48 PM 

Ted Link: 06-632&802818154209psll 

Plant Btoessay-Chronic =M HIg 

Test No: 08-0327.1621 TeslType: PtantChronto Dtirdlon: WA 

Start Date: 25 Jan-18 Protocol: ASTM E1983-02 (2002) Spades: Poe sandbergl 

Ending Date. Dil Water, Souse: 


Comments: recalculated Hoot and length data July 18, 2000 

Sample No: 07.3184.0122 Code: 81542-09 Client• 

Sample Datr. 05 Dec-05 Motorist: Sol Project 


Sample Age: 50d Oh Stagon: 

Comments: J10DT9, E295301 


Analysis Endpolat NOEL LOEL ChV PMSO Method 

03-9052.5158 %Germination 100 WA 18.77% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

02.37964872 Average length (mm) < 100 100 WA 20.14% Equd Vartance t Two-Sar ple 

17-0204-0544 Average AGWt (Wet ntg) 100 >100 WA 40.33% Equal Variance tTwoSarnple 

05-2477-1090 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 4247% Equal Variance t'Mo-Semple 

04-2228.1027 Average Root WL (Wet mg 100 > 100 WA 45.20% Equal Variance tTwo-Semple 

033331-7481 Average Root Wt. (Dry. mg) 100 > 100 WA 48.68% Equal Variance l Two-Sample 

0648306917 Average Total Wt (Wet mg 100 >100 WA 4021% Equal Variance tTwoSample 

04-0108-8910 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 _ WA 43.16% Equal Variance It Two-Sample 

000-092.101.1 CETIS" v1.1.2n:vl An*s4 a^5-' Approval: 

-110-

CUIS Test Summary 


Conc-Y, Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maxknum SE SD CV 

0 Anificial SoWS 5 0.148000 0.60000 1.00000 0.05000 0.17889 20.33% 

100 5 0.46000 OAWW 0.60000 0.04899 0.10954 22.82% 

Average Height(mm)Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum 3E SD. CV 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 45.68 36.700 55.5 3.3695 7.5344 WAS%- 

100 5 37.86 325 50 3.1487 7.0406 18.60% 


Cone--/ Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 ArOficial SOWS 5 124.62 89.800 153.2 12.597 2&187 2260% 

100 5 85.160 70 98 4.8488 10.842 1273% 

Average AGWt (Wekmg).Summary 

Cone-*/. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 51.001 19.99 73.76 11.683 26571 5210% 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE 3D CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 12351 7.9275 19.276 21347 4.7733 38.65% 

100 5 8.6617 3.7850 12067 11438 4.1225 47.59% 

Average Root VVL (Wet, mg) Summary 

Con" Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 90.707 51.115 145.1 17251 38.574 42.53% 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Summery 

Cone-% ControlType Reps Mean Minimum ,Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 7.8666 3.78 14.108 1.8639 4.1678 52.96% 

100 5 5.059 327 8265 0.8758 1.9584 38.71% 



0 Artificial SONS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 26.OW 58.331 32.93% 

100 5 141.71 75.185 213.39 2&05 62721 4426% 

Average Total Wt (Dry, m9) Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Mlnknurn Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 20217 12223 33.384. 3.9407 6.8117 4358% 

100 5 13.721 7.5450 20.11 25474 5.6962 41.52'.. 

Paps 2 d 3 

Report Date: 15 Jui-08 3AS PM 

TntUnIC W4326-6028I8154209psD 

OW-092-101-1 CETISw %1.12revl Appnrral: 

,



Report Date: 18 .10406 3:46 PM 

TOM Unk: os-6328-6028101542D9psS 

% Germination Detail . 

Cores% 

Control 

Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Artfidal SogIS 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 0.80000 

100 0. 40000 0.80000 0.60000 0.40000 0.40000 


Cono '.G Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 An ftw SolvS 50.6 41.8 55.8 36.7000 43.5 

100 33.5 36.3 37 50 32.5 

Avenge Length (rrao) Detail 

Cone-Y. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArOnclal SOWS 138.800 142 1532 99.3000 69.8000 

100 885 90.3000 79 98 70 


Cons-/. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Ar08dat SolVS 67.2900 55.1900 82.338 732233 41A750 

100 19.99 73.76 68.8867 58.3 24.0700 


Cone-A Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Arndt" SOWS 15.1720 10.552 19.276 8.82886 7.92751 

100 3.78500 12.0667 11.0467 119450 458500 

Avengo Root Wt. (Wet, mg) Detail 


0 Ar9fidal SOWS 143.362 140.624 156.524 720233 51.6375 

100 55.9 98.0133 103.41 145.095 51.115 

Avenge Root WL (Dry, mg) Ditail 


0 An cW SoIVS 8.75601 &39399 14.108 3.77999 4295 

1DO 3.75998 4.71000 529 826496 326999 


Cores% Control Type • Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArbffcW SONS 210.652 195.814 240.862 145.247 93.1125 

100 75.89 171.773 172297 213.395 75.185 



0 ArBfidal SOS 23.9280 18.846 33.384 12.8088 122225 

100 754501 16.7767 1&3368 20.11 793502 

-112- 

000-092101-1 CETISW v1.12"A • Analyst 2F" Appmvak-_



Analysis: 113.9052515 8/8154209ps8 

Plant Bioas say-C hronic CH2M Hi ll 

CETIS Anaiysis Detail 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Cont ro l Link Date Analyzed Version 

% Germination Comparison 06 6328.6028 06.83288028 18 JUI-06 3:48 PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt N Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOl3 Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T. Angular(Conected) 0100 100 WA 18.38% 


Control vs Conn% Statiatlo Cr it i ca l P-Value MSD Decision(0.05) 

ArtiBdal So0lSedl 100 421032 1.85955 0.0015 0.19458 WiBcanl Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Square*Mean Square DF F Sta ti stic P-Valor Deeision(0.05) 

Between 0.4852164 0.485216 1 17.73 0.00295 SipNOcent Effect 

Era 02189753 0.D27372 a 

Total 0.70419164 0.5125863 9 


Attribute Test Statis tic, Critical P-Vatw Decision(0.01) 

Variances Variance Rath F 3.50068 23.15450 025233 Equal Variances 

Dlshlbution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.81229. 0.02044 Normal Distribukn 

Dale Summary OrMnal Data Transformed Data 

Cone% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar tificial SoWS 5 0.86000 0.60000 1A0000 0.17889 120581 0.88808 1.34528 020635 

100 5 0.48000 0.40000 0.600011 0.10954 038526 0.66472 0.88608 0.11029 

Graphics 

a m 

w------- ------------------ 

ck 

^ a 

at 

oa 

r 

p 

r 

r 

m 

p 

3 a • • • •'1 . 

i 

m 

• r m 

m 

0 100 -LO .1f -LO -0.a 0.0 0.0 1* la ?-0 

Coeclr gamMlta 

000-092.101-1 CETIS^ A.12revi Analyst% 2" Approval: 

1 

-113=


Comparisons: Page 2 o 9 

Repod Date: 18 Ju1-05 3:48 PM 

Ana lysis; 02-70%M18154209ps8 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic C11211 HIS 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 0643288028 06-63264=8 18 Jul-06 3:46 PM CET1Sv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zefa I NOEL LOEL Toxic Unit° ChV PMSD 

Equal VarlanostTo,9ample C>T Untransfamad 100 >100 1 WA 1&T7% 


Control vs Cone.% StaBsGC C rit ic al P Vaha, MSD Dxkbn(0. 

Artificial SoWSecg100 1.69565 1 25955 0.0842 &57572 No"Ign8lanl E ffect 

ANOVATable 

Some Sum of Squa re s Mean SquareDF F Statistic P-Value Deebio4X0.05)' 

Between 152.8111 152.881 1 2.88 0.12839 NonSignifcantEffect 

Error 425.36 53.16999 6 

Total 578240936 208.05098 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Criti ca l PValue Docisiom(0.01) 

Variances Variance Rata F 1.14512 23.15450 029868 Equal Varances 

DistrituBOn Shapko.WitW 0.902({0 0.23393 Normal Dis tribu tion 


Conn.% CmarolType Count Mean M inimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SoWS 5 45.68 3&7 55.8 7.5344 

100 5 37.118 32.5 so 7.0408 

Graph 

3 'm 

m 

° 0 loo • .2.0 •ts •t.o 4S as 03 la u id 

r Conc1° Rammkks 

_,_^ mtra7mTai CET1sm %ri.12,ev1 Analyst_Appmvah 

m 

m 

m 

m 

-114-



Report Dab: 18 Jul-06 3:46 PM 

Analysis: 02-3798-4WV8154209psil 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH2111 Hit 

Endpoint AnayslsType Sampte Link Control Link Dab Analysed Version 

Average Length (mm) Comparison 0,68328.8028 08.8328-8026 18Ju1-063:46PM CETISA.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOFL Toatc Unlis CAV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untrenatamed c100 100 WA 20.14% 

Group Compartsons 

Control vs Cone-% Statistic 

critical 

P•Vsiw MSO DselaWon(Lo* 

Ar86cial SOUSed 100 2.92349 1.85955 0.0096 • 25.0994 SIgnHicant Effect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P•Vaius Dedslon(0.05) 

SeAveen 3892.729 3892729 1 8.55 0.01919 Significant Effect 

Error 3643.699 455.4624 8 

Total 7536.42847 4348.1914 9 


Artdbute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Daeislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F &74906 23.15450 0.09132 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shaptro-W& W 0.95907 0.77517 Normal Distr®ukn 


Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maalrnum SD 

0 ArbAcW SONS 5 124.62 89.8 1532 2&167 

100 5 85.160 70 98 10.642 

Graphics 

t 1 • 

t 

1 It 

1 1 

.10 1 

< 1 

e 

= 1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 

i 

1 

1 • 

1 

1 

•1• 

o !m •u •u .>d m o0- es u u u 

Corso-% aanWa - 

000-092-161-1 CETtS T• v1.12rev1 Analyst Approval: 

-115-


Plant Bioassay. Chronic 

Comparsom: Page 4 of 9 

Report Date: 18 Jula 3:46 PM 

Analysis: 17-3204.0544MI54209ps8 


Average AGWt (Wet mg) Comparison 0647268028 08.83126 .8028 I8Jul-W 3:46PM CETISvI.12 

Method All H Data Tra nsform Zeta NOEL Wet. Toxic llnas ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwoSamp leC> T Untranslormed 100 >100 I WA 40.33% 


Control vs Can" Statistic Crit ical P-Value MSD Decision(0.0 

ArtiAdal Sog/Sedl 100 093097 1.85955 0.1898 25.7707 Nat-Sig Acam Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa re 

OF F Statistic P-Value Decialon(0.05) 

Between 41 8,1495 41&1495 1 0.87 027911 Non•Sli;WIcant Effect 

Error 3641.203 480.1504 8 

TOW 4257.35239 89829987 9 

ANOVAAssumptiona 

Attribute Test Statistic critical P-Yalu. D.clsbM(1-01) 

Va riances Var ia nce Ra ti o F 2.77655 23.15450 0.34643 Equal Va riances 

Dismu5on Shapiro -Wilk W 097112 0.10300 Normal Dis tribu tion 

Data Summary Origi nal Data • Transformed Data 

Cones/. Con tr ol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Martmum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 63.903 41.475 82.338 15946 - 

100 5 5 1.001 19.99 7&78 26.571 

Graphics 

o 

e 

t 

1 

20 t ^ . 

i 

i t 

t 

r 

° 

s too 

' CWKI% 

r 

r 

•r 

Is -u -tie as sa es sA . u 

000-W2-101 .1 cEnsw%rt.l.2revi Analyst 

r 

r 

r 

r 

Ranker 

3r• 

CH2M 1611 

is 

Mprovat_ —116—

CETIS Analysis Detai l 

Comparisons: pa" 5010f 9 

Report Data: 18 Ju108 3:46 PM 

Analysts: 05-2477-109018154209p5B 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sample Link Control Urdt Data Analyzed Ve rs ion 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 054325-60¢8 06413266028 18 Ju406 3:48 PM mnsv1.12 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it s ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untrane/omed 0100 >100 1 N/A 42.47% 


Contr olvs Cone*A statistic Criti ca l P-Valm MSD Ds iston(0.05) 

ArSficial Solfsedt 100 1.30792 1.85955 0.1136 524509 Non•sweicard FJfect . 

ANOVATabk 

SourceSum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statlstle P-Vaal Decleton(0.05) 

Behvean 34.02485 34.02485 1 131 022723 NonSigrdfiwrd Effect 

Error 159.1186 1 9.88983 8 

Total 191143456 53914675 9 

!NOVA Assump ti ons 

AlIdWAe Test Statist ic Critlml P Value Declsion(C.01 

Variances Variance Ra tio F 134068 23.15450 0.78323 Equal Variances 

Distribu tion Shapiro-Wilk W 0.88302 0.14132 Normal Distribution 


Cone-Y, Control Type Cou ntMean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar tificial SONS 5 .12351 7.9275 19278 4.7733 

100 5 8.6817 3.7650 12.087 4.1225 

Graphics 

it 

1 

YYY 1 

SCe 

^ 

u 

LGS 

t 

1 

r 

1 

. 

q 

sL`r 

i1 

1 

i 

1 

^ • 

ê • 

1 

1 1 

•1 

1 

1 

e I 

• 1 

a 1 


,is •LO -Le -03 0.0 as U Ls 

COM-% 

000.092-101-1 Cense1 V1.12 revi Analyst: — Approval: 

bleb 

7a 

,


Plant Bloassay -Chronic 

. 

Comparisons: 

page 

6Of 9 


Analysis: 04-2226-1027I8150209ps8 

Endpoint MalysisType Sampl*Unk ControlLlnk DateAnslyred Version 

Average Root W t. (Wet, mg) Comparison 08-0328.8028 08 3268028 18 JUW6 3:48 PM CETISV1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Unite ChV PNSO 

Equal Va riance tTwo,%v" C>T Untransformed 11100 >100 1 WA 4510% 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P Value MSD D.cision(O.0 

AN6C,,, VSedl 100 0.81841 1.85955 01184 51.1858 NonSignific"Effed 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Sta ti stic P Vslue Daelston(0. 

Between 1288.721 1208.721 1 0.67 OA3882 Non-Signi ficant Effect 

Error 15153.4 1894.175 8 

Total 18022.1190 3162.8954 9 


Attdtxde Test Statistic Critical P.Valu. D.Cislon(O.01) 


DistrMu llon Shaplro-Wilk W 0.91570 0.32247 Normal Distribution 


Cone-% CoMrolType Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 ArUWal SoâB 5 113.23 51.838 158.52 47.962 

100 5 90.707 51.115 145.1 38.574 

Graph ics 

1 r 

r 

t 

g 

r 

r 

r 

r 

^' 

r 

r. 

1 

.r 

0 

000-092.101-1 

o IN 

c4nc-% 

r 

. r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

•zo •u •u 43 o4 oa u u 

rtanklts 

CH2M Hill 

CEnS"' vt.l.3evl AnaysC &" Approval`_ 

ao 

-118-



Report Date: • 18 Jul 08 3A6 PM 

Analysls: • 03-5331-7481M154209p3B 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CKM Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unk Dab Analysed Version 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Comparison OB-83264M 08-6326.6028 18 Jul-OB 3:48 PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Date Transform Zeta INOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal VarlancetTwo-Sample C3.T Untransfommed 1100 3.100 1 WA 4&88% 


Control vs ConcAA Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Dedsion(0.05) 

ArtificlalSdVSed 100 1.38331 1.85955 0.1050 3.82955 NonS19NfIwnlElfeU 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DIP F Statistic P Vakw Dedslon(0.05) 

Between 19.70663 19.70883 1 1.86 020991 NonSovilcant Effect 

Furor 84.82248 10.60281 8 

Total 104.529087 30.309438 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Deeislon(0.01) 

Variances Varhanoe Ratio F 4.52895 23.15450. 0.17281 Equal Variances 



Cone-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Moan Minimum Maximum SD 

0 ArOffdal SoelS 5 7.WW 3.78 14.106 4.1878 

100 5 5.059 327 8285 1.9584 

Graphics 

0.a i r 

0.7 $ r 

Ok 

31 

r r 

as r 

e .............. ............. 

0. 

r 

41 

LO 

o He 

ca•oK 

• r 

m 

r 

ri • • 

rm 

so -L1 -t.0 a6 a os LA is 

000-092-1014 CETIS^ v1.12rev1 Anaysr &- Approval: -119- 

RankM 

w


Comparisons: Page aOf 9 

Report Dale: 18 JuWB 3:48 PM 

Analysis: 064830-69178154209psB 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CH2 114 H91 

Endpoint Analysls Type Sample Unk Control Unk pate Analysed Version 

Average Total WI (Wel.mg) Comparison 088328.8028 0683266028 18Jui-063:46PM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Date Transform Zeta 9 NOEL LOEL ToxicUnps CAV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwoSampisC>T Unha alonned 11100 >100 . 1 WA 4021% 


Control vs Con" Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Deeisbn(D.05) 

Artificial SoWSedl 100 0.92492 10855 0.1910 712307 NonSkini ficantElkct 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareDF F Statistic P-Value Dectsion(0.05) 

Between 3138.11 3138.11 1 0.66 0.38206 Non-Si0N8nntEfect 

E rr or 29348.01 3888261 8 

Total 32484.1157 6806.3808 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Cri ti cal P Valve Dsclsion(0.01 

Variances Variance Ra tio F 1.15620 23.15450 0.89153 Equal Veriancas 

DlsMution Shapro-WAW 0.88891 0.16917 Normal Distiftt lon 


Cono-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar tificial SONS 5 177.14 93.113 240.86 58.331 

100 5 141.71 75.185 213.4 W-721 

Graphic 

_ yl 1 

@ 

1 

n1; i 

s 1 

1. 1 1 1 

• 1 

1 

t 1 

I 

0 

000.092-1014 

0 

Conch 

•1 

i• 

I 

1 

300 

-100 

as -13 -is -is 

I 

1 

1 

1 

0A 

Rerleita 

LS 3a Ls 

CETIS° vl.1.3ev1 Analy3t î" 

Approral: 

Le 

—120—


Comparisons: • Page 9 of 9 


Analysis: 04.01"1019154209psB 

Plant Bloassay. - Chronic CH2M HIO 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unit Date Analyzed Version 

Avtxage Total Wt(Dry, mg)Compa rison 0663MW28 0663266028 18JUM3:48PM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t TWO-Sample C>T Unbansfaned 100 >100 1 WA 43.16% 


Control vs Conn% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Decision(0.05) 

ArIftal SaB/Sedl 100 1.38453 1.85955 0.1018 8.72574 Non-SOtficanl Effect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareDF FStatistic P-Value De clslon(0.w 

Between 105.52 105.52 1 1.92 02(1359 NonSigni6antEffect 

Error 440.3715 55.04844 8 

Total 545.891441 160.58839 9 

ANOVAAssumptions; 

Anftut• Teat statistic Cruical P-Valus Deelslon(0.01 

Variances Variance Nato F 239308 23.15450 0.41876 Equal Variances 

Dislrbution Shapiro•WIIk W 0.91915 035017 Normal Dts11bukn 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Da ta 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artf Gal SOWS 5 20.217 12223 33384 &8117 

100 5 13.721 75450 20.11 5.6962 

Graph ic s 

0 3 

a 

3 it 1 

_^ 3 

3 1 cC 1 1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

M l 1• 

e 

o 

t•no% 

lm 

1 • 

1 

1 

a ---------- 1 --- -------------- 

to 

1 

• 1 

1 

^ ae .0 •la -0.s Oa Os la u 

aanlils 

—121— 

000-092-101-1 CETIStav1.12reA Areyst—L^— Approval, i 1 

• 

to

APPENDIX B 

CHAIN OF CUSTODY 

-122-

^ z^ytY 

F-1 Washinllton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051 Pare I of 1 

tttor 

Cr—=m 

Conway Cooled Teicohoae Na Protect Coordinator 

JOAN KESSNER 373.4688 KESSNER,JH 

roiect Designation Samollot Loca tion SAFN o. 

100 & 300 Area Conporenl of the RCBRA • Inc lsl So 600-131 RC-031 

Ice Chest No. F7dd Logbook No. COA Method of Shioment 

E41596 BESRAS6S20 

Shinned To Mile Property No. DI D of Lading/Air Bi ll No. 

CH2M HILL _ _ _ A060151 

FOSSiBLE SAMPLE HAZARDS/REMARKS 

NONE Preservation 

Special NandllnE and/or Storage ee 

NONC• 

SAMPLE ANALYSIS 

TypeofContal aw 

GM PA 

• 

Nao(Coaminer(s) t t ' 

Volume • 

t000x^ 

{ ► $^ 

sms (p ip Saimaa 

sww Ta&y 

b.uantaa 

sa t+enww [ 

Tamar 

ASnt Ertn 

. 

Price Codc $L Data Turnaround 

"Quality 1.] 

^mDk Na Matrix • Sanvie Data Sampk 7"mm '" -3 F' 'i: _ l.,;^^ 

^t{ 

t a!„ ^::.. 

ii.: v'! .cars' ..+5. 

•.^•pt^r 

ti_. wat 

r 

^';t=J:: 

^ 

S10 W 4 SOIL 10-31-OS a 

MOM- SO IL 

,J"Bwt- SO IL 

1108wFe SOIL 

J105W3 SOIL 

Cj(AIN F PO SigrLIPrint Names SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS 

dF 

. 

.t. •"• ^• 

iu': 

_ 

^^^ 9tN5:' 

D*Wfimr 

By15bdG Duer[tan 

- -Q (^160T 

^^ /^^s /(^•^ ^j 

Vxnm by Kjcl&W . 3511:•Amocois-350.J:IC Anion .300.P, Percent Solids 

Pot 000 By'Reaovd tan Dam?ma Racelved Bptiared to DaWrwe 

ingiitbcd ByrRenovd Ftom Dawrim Remkvd ByStoM is Gmr1"mrc 

uisW BpVAm nd Fmm Da Tan Raeaind Bysmnd Is DanRitoe 

Ratimtualmi BpfRsnovcd From DaWfimt R eceived ByStond In DmWTM 

a*,islad Dy/Rcaswcd I— DaWfom Rcai.d Brsmnd In DateTm 

î`r / 

ro 

= B/-S^/a? -oI 

LADORATORY Reetind By Tian Dwr/iN+ 

SECTION 

.U. SAMPLE Dopmal MCdiod Dispmcd By DeWrim 

POSITION 

B7+1-EE-011 (002912005) 

. 

45 Days 

^.i• ::;^Pi':•: 

-•^,Û1.. - ,,,^ 

Matra c 

so w 

.°-"«.' 

o^ 

a.av 

no.srr 

at.am t4+r 

.0-rim 

s.ue:s 

s-oaa

^, A901 

WVashinzton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051-4 Pale, 1 of 1 

for Comoaov Con tact Telephone No. P rotect Coordinator 

COLLOM TOANKESSNFR 3754698 IE SSNE&IH 

roiect Dcstanation Semolina Location SAFNo. 

100& 300 Am Congonent of t he RCBRA - IncremenW'SO PR 23 RC-051 

Ice Chest No. Field Loeboot No. COA method of shipment 

EL.1596 BESRAS6520 

Shinned To 

CH2MHILL 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE HAZARDSrtiEMARKS 

Offdte Prooem No. 

A060151 

Bill of Ladina7A4 Bill No, 

NONE Pnaervatlon 

Spedal Handling and/or Blouse 

NONE 


TPpeof Container 

No.o(Contaloer(s) 

Volume 

Hw NOW 

G/P PA 

1 t 

IOW$ -mw 

stone " 

sceb-Olie Sostivt 

SP- r T..kbl 

Y 

ASTM , 16 

T-idw 

Aftat cup 

\\'rO 

Price Code $L Data Turnaround 

Air Quality 1 j 

45 Days 

^•^- _ --_• --_ 

Samp le No. Metric • Sample Date Sample Time _ r >: i • ,.,, +", ; Yom•' R'°' ".tu i « ' 

J10DV4 SOIL It^^••J 'e7p I I •"/ 

J10DV5 SOIL 

J10OV6 SOIL 

J10DV7 SOIL 

J10DV$ SOIL 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION 

Re' From Uuelrme 

1- -e` S 

Sign/Print Neonate; 

a«.^r^BrRmnd^ 

12',eaJ %l.^' 

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS 

This Chris of Canadrforsedoampaa am tamRr ofbA PAM Da1Ji'M 

collected NW to We CH2M Hill 

u•5•,,)'rr,. - Con.Uisbbm Br2emondF 

sagvmhtd BSlRmrvW Fmm 

DatoTim 

wWrme 

Received 11yoteondie 

Received Bps din 

a fora=r.empcp.n don Wad .lw cb,% . 

DaWrm 

(1) PoLkk$iu(D ry Siw) . DC32:MobunCm .D221 $. TOC - W6k PH (SGM-"CS: 

Roopabr Klc"-331AAxr nk-=J;ICAnim-300APCwt Soft 

d it 

Dowilime 

^y 

Re6elviWBr7movWflom Wavlhee Received BrUmello DaWrina 

rTh ^j. td^•^"' 

W 

• BIrFaTmrcdFmn DaWImr 0.ceeivW 83BtaedL DuWfima 

hmquiC4d BYRtnowd From Dwoffime Received BpSbMb Dowrime 

AJcbe^ iD = Q^sd e+^'8 ^ • 

LABORATORY RecehedBy Tile De10ry101e 

SECTION 

10IAL SAMPLE Diepotat MWrd Domed By DaWlbne . 

ÊAPOSM 

Wi •EE-011 (062872005) 

' 

1"It 

e.ea 

e...^. 

ww 

v.rr 

ow 

ot.p..t}tev 

o'v+b. 

e-v4r 

Won

sroicct Daiai 

100 & 300, 

Ice Chest No. 

Hanford 

Shinnad To 

C"2MHII.I. 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE IIA7AR0. 4IMMARKS 

Potentially Radi"Hi r. 

Special Handling and/or Stora 

NONE 

"ems î ie1 

RNingainc^d BytRennKd Flan 

Rarog uistud B)IRcnanM rain 

Rtligynhed BytRcpi&v l Fawn 

Rc&gci4ad llytaeanrod Fm.a 

r 

JOAN KGSSNF:R 375.4688 

Sampliat Location 

RCRRA - hxrcmonut Sec Upland Backfill Clevaled•100• 17-2 

go 

Field Lotbook No. COA 

61.1506 BESRAS6520 

Offsite Proocriv No. 

A060151 

PracrraGoa 

Type of Container 

No. of Contaluer(s) 

Volume 

New PwM 

CAP AL 

I I 

logos 

11001i 

hela(nra Sea lbe 

niuwaYaa Sol M f1Mk 

SAMPI.F. ANALYSIS Sosw..rev 

remdr 

AS1M aint 

Mavis • Samok Deck Sampk Time ..,^"J• ' .. 

J10DT8 SOIL . 1 I1 I141aS 1 I-I s 

LABORATORY I arrehd Ily 

SMI-EE•011 (08/242005) 

lauorrim 

r>uuYrl°o 

kLYSIS REQUEST I 

Proicct Coordinator 

KESSNBR,J11 

SAF N'o. 

RC-031 

Pry"Cade 8L 

i Air Quality 

Metbod ofshiomcal - 

Dill of LadioB/Air Bill No. 

RC•osi-v Jbic i or 2 

Da Turnaround 

45 Days 

JPrfnt Names SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS Maw e 

if Padide Sae tDry S*s*)-D422: Moinre CaNem-D321 DI-216:70C k 9060: PH ^• 90th 

1 

uro8cz ►7 KJeWabl•351.7:MZro.s-MAI: IC Micas- 30OA. Pemer Solid, aowv 

Nlb 

/ TO = BisYa oJeSbrvd to Da ar /^ • / Q 

— O 3:ÂMi By4rasd In Dalt/Tinq ft u U ue 

OpSiamd In Dawrime 

• MW 

rvxrw 

Vl;•Y 

We0aa1^ 

By6ww041 (a DalNria c z•o1a

£ A^kv& 

asllinaton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051-15 rx¢ 1 or L . 

o1(pptor ComoaoTContact TNeoboneNo. Proicet Coordinator 

LICOLLOM JOAN KESSNER 375.4688 KESSNER.JR Price Code $L 

Proi¢cl Desianalion Semolina Location SAF No. 

100 & 300 Am Cowl oflhe RCBRA • Incremental So Upland Native Reference-Central Plateau RC-051 

Ice CbU1 N o. Field Loeboo4 N o. COA , Method ofShlomenl 

EL-1596 BESRAS6520 

Sbipaed To 

C142MMU. 

011site Prontrte No. 

A060131 

Bill of LadindAfr Di ll No. 

POSSIBLESAMPLE IIAZARDSMEMARKS - - 

NONE 

Preservation 

Nor vw 

Special Handling aallor Storage ge 

NONE 



No. of Coatalner(s) 

Volume 

0/P PM' 

l I 

IWOd tldcoj 

• Saam(Ilia xea row 

' iadd T*"Y 

1+••++ ,ssrM nook 

so Mewed, 

T"kky 

ASIM MU 

Alf Quality . 

Data Turna round 

45 Days 

Sample No. Matrix • Sample Data Sample Time ;3yn„j^ ^ :'^.,;:%' :,'r{ :^T ,:,ns:5 .^,..T_ r^r; 'M? .;^ ;.>••{ :.. a, :.v ._! 

JIODV2 SOIL 11-15 -05 ILO :0O 1 —I 

CHAIN OF POSSFSSIO SIBn/Print Names. SPECIAL LVMVCnONS 

Muria 

Re' ukhed 0 Fmm Raohed ByvSwed V Daxlrime 

TNs Wbt efeasmdy form denmoas be bwsftr ¢rtnda Ikld collec ted ials to the CMM MR 

w 

^— (s f •. 3v /q--^ Comffo iaomwy rer kuu^nwlFnpoouo.and a0e•oeM. re.¢,r.w 

1 

Ie!( 

pa.0 

! 

() p * S"ID7 Sieve)•Da22; moiurt Canteen- 02216. TOC. 9060; PH(W). 941: s 

// / 

P.Wicd 

Ftom W DaWTi c Rani ' By/Spted ia wsaRlnr y;3 

7 

"'w n,a..aY 

L ^/ 

B ,b p•yJ...y, Zo = !J/sy^-o`y 

¢e....u.ta 

I:aovSod eempm >•'R Fmm D.wrrbne 

Received By4wtaa r 

in 

o.wrrm,e 

ur.+s 

v-sa.a,e 

tulingols6W DlrItconved Fetes Dowrrbts Raehed Byf8- V Daldrime 

^•' 

¢8nquukd By/RattovW Fnee ' DaidTlma Raeircd Byaw” V DswTme 

LABORATORY Revolved 01 Tide Detdl6na 

SECrfON 

FM L SAMPLE Disposal McdeW Dtwmw By Dswrt'me 

OSMON 

i e-019 (om 2m)

Washinaton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-oSi-12 Ifts- 1 of t 

Collett 

L CO OM 

Conlnanv Contact 

)OAN KESSNER 

Telcohooe No. 

375.4688 

Proicct Coordinator 

KESSNER, J14 

Prolect Desitnation 

^ 100 & 000 Area Canponrnl of IM R('ORA • Intlemcnbl $o 

Samoline loca tion 

Upland Backfill Loa•116•DR•I t2 

SAF No. 

RC-0 51 

-Ice Chest No.. Field Logbook No. COA 

E1..1596 

SESLUS20 

Method of Shiameat 

Shinned To OrWte PromrtT No. DDI of Ladiaa4Vr Bill No. 

CH2MHILL 

POSSIBLESAMPI.E 11AZARMWEMARKS 

A060151 

NONE 

Preservation 

Ilan: a, .+ 

Special Handling and/or Storage 

Type of Contciner 

NONE No. orCoomlaer(s) 


Volume 

rrP PIG 

1 

10001 

I 

140co 

Sa aaeenw Set y 

SpW TU 919 

I.m.a..a 

S%A^Hewww 

T•dbr 

ASTa192173 

Price Code 

Air Quality 

Sample No. Matrix Sample Dam Sample, Time ;.^:. _ •^ ;: '`?^''S^"^^ .f` 5'n _ .t :. a' .'l tt^Y• ii r: +'r + 

J10DV1 SOIL - 5-b5 ao,a 

.. ,< ... . 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION SICn?ri nt Names SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS , 

7'6ie thaw ofeuxady foemdorenw deewferefbdk field eNkcud eo'ueda; C7WA HM 

RNI oialy Dymkved fo>t11 Recei.edD Y Dawriae 

CW Wlil lobMwy In' iaoal..ml WCPMl Mb w al4pua nS. 

3 

HL 

Data Turnaround 

45 Days 

ait6 cd BpA .cd Fiwn 

1 

WnJi'km 

'—' ' _05 

0. 

v ^/ 

11l Pank4Slu(Dry Sitve) • DdlLtaoinre Cenwn•02'_IdcTOC • eOaq pH ISoW•o0a5: 

%intenby Kicl&W•3$1. Z- An=XWA.3ld5:ICA.d m•300&..P=MSods W.W. •'r ow 

Ra' WDY01". Foam W1°t17oe 0. DyYS V OncT.^/^ C 

os:a.. t•+, 

Reaxeuidsd Oyfaemvm Fnmo Doo31L^r Rcnlrtd ayr ww to 

Rclk.yuWW DyfRae.od Fame Daldrkm Recehed brZwedm Daw/[k1e 

NieQ,idW ar%eneved Fm Daleffxa Recei ed s#sww M Dawrime 

LABORATORY 

SECTION 

Rud+a1DY We 

FINAIISA6IPLE 

DISry XITION 

Dbped Mcded D4paa4 By 

BHI 11(08129/2005) 

y 

D.lertkn 

Wefrow 

Manx• 

py 

aoa 

1rai.+ 

r«e,eni^ 

a•eo^ 

Lww

6,2Y57 

iWashin )3ton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REOUEST RC-851-16 â 1 or L 

car 

LffOLLOM 

Protect Daienafion 

100 & 300 Am Coe pw t of the RCBRA - Incm"lal So 

Cemoaov Contact Telcohone No. 

JOANKE.SSNER 3754638 • 

Samnlintlocatioa 

Upland Native EkvatodJA Jones 

Pmicct Coordinator 

KESSNER,IH 

SAFNo. 

R"51 

Prit"Codc SL 

Air Quality i 

Data lroroa round 

45 Days 

Ice Chat No. Field Lotbook No. COA ) Method ofshiomat 

EL-1596 BESRA56520 

Shinned To Of Cite Pronaty No. BIB of Ladict/Alr Bill No. 

CH2MNIU. 

POSSIBLESAMPLE FIAZARDSIREMARKS 

A060151 

NONE Preservation 

Wm mane 


NONE 


No. ofContalocr(s) 

GP 

I 

Py0 

I 

Volume 

Iowa 

`10tH 

- fesaestt)iO 

tavri+t 

bog MOs 

T" I 

SAMPLEANALYSIS 

lOOOOnnova 

SKi9 n. ^ t i: 

T-f r 

Ass" 911n 

Sample No. MAWX• Sample Date Sanpla Tune n'f it ^p^`^: at•.'.vw^-i:.;:`r°^' t ^..^ 0.. :Si" ?L'' 

J10OV3 SOIL p 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION SIBNPrint Name - SPECIAL INSTRUMONS 

Tbu Win oftmtody kemdoeaaeW dr trarhr ofbmlc Geld eoBaeW sockbJs CII1M Hit 

is 0 Fsm eehrd8 

/ 3 7 

— 

Curvauk lebomucy for lowime W pewmidonand eeyuaint. 

• 11 1 O 

B ved^m^m a 

1 Rccehrd au?iuOa 

4 

{^.. /7 o'f tT:it Niuopo by KleNJd.3Sll• Aurmer.3S01:IC 

Miapo•7044^P/rrxn15oG4 

n 

RNvisbed B)Mleno.d Pmm ateri'm RecehrdB )n Dw?ias 

I)w*.&Iod DyAt omcil Fmm awrmr torched Sy+Smmd Is azure 

Iinyai)hed By/acaorcd ►Own Da/fms Rccdved ByrAsed In awrmr 

Ivagosted BylRcawnd Awn newrim Received Brim" to Datallive 

Maraca 

(1) " le Sin (Dry Skye)- DR; MoiweC me.=Ift OC. 9064 pH CSoi l) -eb1S: a wo 

J5b^j =U S1sAl^.-WA 

. 

LABORATORY aeccivoe M Title aOerRne 

PSECf10.V 

LSAMPLE Deposal Mednd Dupowd BY De vf "m 

39POSMON 

BVEE•011 (0&2W=) 

5-34 

ap 

ao:b ^"I`,.,.. 

wt^. 

a WIM 

r-rgwMa 

Ic•o++

W/ oT M 

WAshlazton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REOUEST RC-051-11 Paae 1 or 1 

oilecw Comoanrcontact Teleobone No. ., Proiect Coordinator 

L S!e ILOM JOAN KESSNER 1754688 KESSNER-JH Price Code Data Tm naroend 

Protect Destitution ' Sam 01111214)eati0a • SAFNo. 

t00& 3oo Amacampooentortha RCBRA-Inc "tal So Riparian FJevate"ite 07 Up river 1004) RC-051 

Ice Chest No. Ftdd Logbook No. COA Method orShiOlnent 

EI.1596 BFSRAS6S20 

Shinned To 

CH2MHIIL 

POSSIOLE SMIPLE HA7,ARDSAtEMARKS 

Ofraite Pronerty No. 

A0601S1 

BW of LadinWAlr Dill No. 

NONE 

Preserratlon 

>+e.a thaw 

Special Haatliin g and/or Storage 

NONE 

Type of eoatal'ner 

No. of Container(a) 

OF 

I 

NO 

I 

Volume 

1000x 4004' â—T 

ylaor tt—Lt^ 

Sr Yertgr Son Phr 

• Sadd Tarhir 

o #U. taax 


s- sitTeday 

r 

• Asnd vhn 

Sampto No. Matrix • Sa rpk Date Saop4 Tima spa ''"c 

J10OV0 SOIL ^.Z .p j 

A)r Quality 

^ 3: ? ,r`• y8, k v?'o^..s. ,y Y,•,:.. -^ x •- q?:y 'i` „t:';;R - 

a p (, I 

HL 

;,s3.:. - a'• e B)ruotedH Dre7fNr 

Cor"W hbwatmY tw hoceerJ pewruion and WUgwltaa. 

Z.Q. Q Tt 

to ana 

I' avW` vaomfirra 9â7^ a .y+ 

(1) Patrick ft'va (Dry &m) -Dot Moiwm Carer-D73Ik TOC. 90eR p)1 (SoiO-OWit 

et a-a.ti 

r.. 

11 1 f amM by KjdGN•SSI.k Aamm-k-)145: 1C Aron-7044 Pram Sdtda 

2 05 

eon 

ReRaq B F Ere Raekd8 Y ima 

70 p p 

a n^f vrr 

lj10° v1^+M = F7 ^sye2 — 07 

r Lit" 

^,„h-A Byluvowd Flora Data?aca Rrai.W BAWW In Dre!riar {{ 

rw.. 

ttdiagrtdad Bymeoowd FlOw DaM?iar n.ratd eyrsora V DaWfin 

Itaquiahed By(ttmmd Fnwn Dascrrm RaedrW BplwW In Dew/rift 

LABORATORY Aa"ier'd By Tide Dowrwo 

SECTION 

FIN SAMM.Ii: Dupad Method Digowd By Dourrim 

D ITION 

Bw-IF-0 v2w=5) 

xar.

NIAlshineton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051-20 Paae L or 1 

EZ89 -1 

olk Commas Contact Teltohone No. Proictl Coordinator 

LC LLOM JOAN KESSNER 1754688 KESSNMJH Price Code 8L • Data Turnaround 

Air Quality45 Days 

Protect Dest"Alion Samoline Loaaaou SAF Na 

100 & 300L Area t or IM RCDRA - Incremental So Riparian LowSi W l0 Doworiver 100-D RC45i . 

Ice Cheat No, Field LoegookN o. COA Method ofSh)oment 

E41596 BES56520 

Skinned To 

CH2MHI LL 

POSSIISLESAMPLE HAZARDS/R&IARKS 

White Prowty No. 

A060131 

Bill of Ladina/Air Bill No. 

NONE 

Preaervation 

na,. 


NONE 

Typeor Costaloer 

No.ofContalner(a) 

C3P 

I 

Pro 

I 

Volume 

1000s 

ems. 


,t 

! ^Ja 

See P-W iea 

sonid Taira 

", 

m.vnis 

i u Dita nag" 

AaTM 0172 

Sample No, Matrix • Sample Data Samp le Time ti?",s-.>:.Y. ;itti•?.^:'•,y.d.:=:": ;•:..' t`•a;1.;. _: "' i^• '' ?.a '`.: ..r• 

JIDUS SOIL i if -`$-c) 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION SledPriat Names SPECIAL INSTRUCnONS 

This Wlee yfo ref eoaeetcd wbbthe Q12M 16R 

I'mevia4d8 -sovdF tint r 7 Rec' BAored Dadfona 

Dyntesevd Frwa Damm" RccdndB Shor ed is DaleRine 

Rellegakhd ByrReswd From Ib1arr°w Received ey9nd is DaaNfine 

RcRnq®Isd ByrRcveed Front 

Dawrem Rcou.M ByrS "to Daadrms 

Rs)igvulsd Byntnawd From DUsIT a Received BAwred Is Datdfbna 

,Iiwq„lead DyRtipKy etma Dawri n acceivd R#s wd b Datdrlme 

LABORATORY 

SECTION 

Reread Br Tnle 

FUA4 SAMPLE I D'spo6al Me9rd DAP"eed By 

DW.PSMON 

81.14-0 372W=5) 

matrix e 

(1) Par ticle Sin (MySieve) • Dan* MoaWe Cavern - D2214=-9060: VK(So0) - 9063: t M 

Nlwfm by RJcWaht-SSISMvmnis- SSW: IC An"- 300A Pcrcem Salida 

/'1Dfvy,û^ ZQ = SrJ^â r 

/ . 

D•Wr6rs 

DettlfYrs 

y;w 

M+c 

www 

aura u 

v-vwoae 

aqs

^y,- c 29 S^ 

shin¢ton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REOUEST RC-OSI-6 Pere L or 3 

Iltslle4 Cumosov Contael Telcnhose No. ?"!"ICoordinator 

I_ M JOAN KESSNER 3154688 . KESSNER•JN PAeeCode Data Tu rnaround 

HL 

Proicct Designation Samoliatt Location SAE No. 

100 da 300 Arcs Component of the RCDRA - Incremental So Riparian Rerc rn Site al3 Vcmita Bridge RC-051 

It* C1cst No, Field Loebook No. COA Method of Sldoment 

EL-1596 BESRAS6520 

Shinned To 

CH2MHILL 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE HAZARnSIREMARKS 

OHsite Prooerlr No. 

A060151 

B01 of LadiodAir Bill No. 

NAVE 

Prnerrallon 

Neva waft 

",— 

^ 


NONE 

Type of 

No. of Contaluer(s) 

Q/P 

1 

PIG 

1 '( 

^ 

' 

Volume 


HOOa'h ^y 

• 


sat pww 

fpeY 

sronale•s 

swear 

TMjl1 

stH .r.er 

Tm y 

ASTM uln 

Air Quality •; 45 Days 

Matrix • Sample Data SanVrk Turn: `:' 'YJra. x>}' 

-1:.^. ^...? ' k^ { +,F i k '.:i'' 

`^:• ^^.: her a^^: -.^' 

ri 

'.•'f^. 

: 3 •: v' 

Sample Na :'lr: :fd. , • + .:.' 't ,. 

JIODT9 SOIL 'Z— ter, 5 •.CL) ,^ X 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION Sign/Print Nsn SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS 

This eAtin ofeasmdr lormdomwKs do nnmfaof" rrtl watt led=16 w dr CIUM Hill 

Re' 0 Fwm DawwTva Sy med In MWrrne < 

} 

, Corvoau Mba>taP forheammnl Rtamdot rd xlipôlin4 

•Q.t^ 

NaquislmdB Fmm clocalme RauhN AVOSW rod In Dawr im, (1) Witte 5'ue (Drr Sim)-WA Moblre Canna -=I (h TOC =9068 PH Onto 

J3 O 

G^ /f )( r(j, -6..+: 

r 

/G. 

N^gen br l4atyy -351.7:Anwar-)30.3:ICAa -30D.0;Pn SOWS 

^S 

Br7kmo`

July 20, 2006 

ELR Inc. 

PROJECT MANAGEMENT. ENGINEERING, & TECHNICAL SERVICES 

Ms. Joan Kessner 

Subcontract Technical Representative 

Washington Closure Hanford LLC 

3070 George Washington Way 

Richland, WA 99354 

Dear Ms. Kessner: 

ACUTE SCREEN ING BIOASSAYS — AMENDED BLUEGRASS REPORTS 

CONTRACT NUMBER 0000X-SC-G0553 

Enclosed are amended Bluegrass reports for the following Sample Delivery Groups: 

• BG1542-01 thm 09 — Repo rt amended July 18, 2006 

3 • BG1542-01A, -02A, -03A and -08A and BG1566-01 thru 05 — 

Repo rt amended July 19, 2006 

• BG 1575-01 thru 11— Repo rt amended July 19, 2006 

• BG 1589-01 thru 09 — Repo rt amended July 19, 2006 

An electronic copy of this information is provided for your convenience. 

Should you have any ques tions, please feel free to call me at (509) 531-8774. 

Sincerely yours, 

0^064^ 

Emmett L. Richards 

President 

&.-o3/ 

L::Wb / 

Enclosures

DO ,tom n ^^, n @- 

di§§f|§!§§^ 

qI w -w -w nn - 

§^| §§k722&;§2 

q 

| ^| 

! q q 

I"W'Lu nnn - 

^& ®§l535)^^+ 

q.^^wQ n ! n 2£ 

. t Q n ui ut 

|f! È - ^- I^ S§§§ 2® , 

!! 

| 

| 

, 

n 

fill ' 

w r. 1W n t2 n - 

§;:§§§;§2§ 

| q .Q -W t tt^ -Lu - 

!| !^' 2§22§2§§§§ 

| 

|{ ^q . -W 

Q n -W 

-W -W 

i| fit 2§|22§§§22 

^|^q , nnnnn ^ n ^- 

| a n S# n ;7;§^ 

|t f ,^^sam22i 

i 

| Za;a§&22k 

Ig§g§g§gco

BIOASSAY REPORT 

CHRONIC SCREENING BIOASSAYS 

Conducted April 5 through May 8, 2006 

Report Amended July 19 9 2006 

• Prepared for 

ELR CONSULTING, INC. 

WASHINGTON CLOSURE HANFORD 

Prepared by 

CH2M HILL 

2300 NW Walnut Boulevard 

Corvallis, Oregon 97330 

July 19, 2006 

Lab I.D. Nos. BG1542-01A, -02A, -03A, and -08A 

And BG1566-01 thin 05 

SDG NumberBG1566 and BG1542A 

—1—

CONTENTS 

Section 

Page 

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 3 

METHODSAND MATERIALS .......... .. ... » ................................................. _......................... 3 

TESTMETHODS .......... » ............................................................................................ 3 

TESTORGANISMS .» .................................... ..............:............................................. 3 

CONTROLSOIL .......................................................................................................... 3 

HYDRATIONWATER........»...........» ........................................................................ 3 

TESTCONCENTRATIONS ....................................................................................... 3 

SAMPLECOLLECTION ............................................................................................ 4 

SAMPLECROSS-REFERENCE TABLE ..................................................... ..._....... 4 

SAMPLEPREPARATION ......................................................................................... 4 

TESTINITIATION ...................................................................................................... 5 

TESTMONITORING ...» ............................................................................................ 5 

WATERINGSCHEDULE ...................................... .. .......................................... ......... 5 

TESTTERMINATION ............................................................................................... 6 

DATAANALYSIS ...................................................................................................... 7 

RESULTSAND DISCUSSION .............................................................................................. 8 

CHRONICRESULTS ................................................................................................. 8 

CERTIFICATIONSTATEMENT ............................................................................ 10 

APPENDIX A. RAW DATA SHEETS 

APPENDIX B. CHAIN OF CUSTODY. 

—2—

INTRODUCTION 

CH2M HILL conducted chronic screening bioassay tests using the Sandberg bluegrass (Poa 

sandbergit) on soil samples provided by the ELR Consulting for Washington Closure 

Hanford, Richland, Washington. The tests were conducted from April 5 through May 8, 

2006. 

Following recommendations of ari additional QA review, the statistical analysis for shoot 

height and root length presented in the original report (May 25, 2006) were recalculated. 

Subsequently, this document presents the amended results and serves as the final report. 

TEST METHODS 

METHODS AND MATERIALS 

The chronic test methods were performed according to: Standard Guide for Conducting 

Terrestrial Plant Toxicity Tests, ASTM E 1963-02 (2002). 

TEST ORGANISMS 

The seeds used were obtained from Native Grass Seeds, Comville, Arizona. All test 

conditions were maintained during planting, germination, and growth phases of the test as 

prescribed by the ASTM protocol. 

CONTROL SOIL 

The control soil used in the tests was artificial soil comprised of 70 grade silica sand (70 

percent by weight), kaolin clay (20 percent), and peat moss (10 percent). Calcium carbonate 

(0.4 percent of total weight) was added to adjust soil pH to 7.0 t OS. 

HYDRATION WATER 

The water used to initially hydrate the control and test soils was Milli-Q equivalent de, 

ionized water. After initial hydration, all test chambers were watered with half strength 

Hoagland's solution on an every other day basis. All hydration was accomplished via sub 

irrigation. 

TEST CONCENTRATIONS 

The concentration tested in the bluegrass tests was 100 percent test soil with control soil 

alone for the lab control. For the bluegrass tests, 50 seeds per concentration were used with 

five replicate test chambers per concentration and 10 seeds planted per chamber. Following 

germination, test chambers were thinned to a maximum five seedlings per replicate. 

—3—

SAMPLE COLLECTION 

Individual soil samples used during the testing were collected between October 31. 2005. and 

December 6, 2005, for the S15G number 13G 1542 and March 21, 2006 through April 3, 2006, 

for SDG number BG1566. The samples were stored in the dark at 4°C until the initiation of 

the initiation of the tests. Chain of Custody for sample collection is provided in Appendix C. 

SAMPLE CROSS-REFERENCE TABLE 

Table 1 provides a cross-reference of the. Client ID numbers, sampling dates, sampling 

locations, Bluegrass test sample identification (SDG) numbers, and Analytical Lab SDG 

numbers. The SDG 1542 samples were repeat tests from an earlier batch of tests due to a 

laboratory error on the test endpoint. 

Client ID Sample 

Table 1 

Sample Cross-Reference 

Sample 

Bluegrass test Analytical 

Date 

Location 

SDG Lab SDG 

J10DW4A 10/31/2005 600-131 BG1542-0IA B2748 

J10DV4A 11/08/2005 PIT 23 BG1542-02A B2801 

JI0DT8A 11/1412005 Upland Backfill Elevated-100-F-2 BG1542-03A B2831 

110LJ5A 11/28/2005 RiparinLow-Site#10 

Dowmiver 100-D 

BG1542-OBA E2897 

111JB8 03/21/2006 100-KRIPARIAN45 BG1566-01 F1399 

JlIJB7 03/26/2006 100-K RIPARIAN 94 BG1566-02 F1421 

111JH5 03/28/2006 100-HRIPARIAN#8 BG1566-03 F1438 

J11JH8 04/03/2006 UPPER RIPARIAN N12 BG1566-04 F1470 

J11JH4 04103/2006 100-F RIPARIAN#7 BG1566-05 F1471 

SAMPLE PREPARATION 

Test soils and control soil were dried and homogenized prior to use. For each replicate, 90 

grams dry weight of soil was added to each test chamber. The soils were initially hydrated 

with Milli-Q equivalent de-ionized water via sub irrigation. In addition, a sub sample of the 

soil was added to a surrogate chamber and hydrated for pH measurements. 

—4—

TEST 1MTIATION 

Tests were initiated by planting 10 seeds in each test chamber. Seeds were planted at a depth 

of I % times the seeds diameter (approximately 2 millimeters) and covered gently. A small 

amount of hydration water (10 ml) was'sprayed onto the soil surface to ensure seeds received 

moisture. 

TEST MONITORING 

According to information provided by Native Glass Seed (seed supplier), germination should 

take place between 14 and 28 days. The number of seeds in each test chamber that had 

germinated was recorded on days 12, 14,16,19, 21, and 23. Germination was determined to 

have occurred on day 19. 

Observations of the shoot appearance were recorded 7 days after germination (26 days after 

planting). The number of germinated seeds in each test chamber was also recorded. 

Chambers that had more than five germinated seeds had shoots removed to prevent 

overcrowding. These test chambers were thinned to five seedlings each. 

Soil pH was taken at test initiation and termination by placing a subsample of soil into a 

specimen cup, adding hydration water, and mixing prior to the pH measurement. 

WATERING SCHEDULE 

Test chambers were hydrated via subirrigation with deionized water prior to test initiation 

and daily thereafter for the first 3 days via subirrigation. Test sediments were hydrated by 

placing the all test chambers of the same test concentration into a hydration chamber 

containing deionized water and allowing the water to percolate into the bottom of the 

chamber. Hydration chambers were kept full during this period 

On Day 4, the water was removed from the hydration chambers and the test chambers 

allowed to drain. 

Starting on Day 5, test soils were supplemented with nutrients by the use of half strength 

Hoagland's solution delivered via subirrigation. Hydration chambers were kept filled for 24 

hours, then empty for 24 hours. 

—5—

TEST TERMINATION 

Tests were terminated 14 days post germination (33 days after planting). The number of 

seedlings, shoot appearance and height (tallest shoot of each plant), and root appearance and 

length (longest recovered root of each plant) was recorded 

For each test chamber, all of the above ground biomass (i.e. shoots) from all germinated 

plants were combined and placed into tared aluminum tins. The shoots were weighed to 

determine the wet weight immediately following removal from the test chamber. The shoots 

were then dried in an oven at 60'C for a minimum of 24 hours. The shoots were then placed 

into a desiccator for a minimum of 2 hours and weighed to determine dry weight. 

The wet and dry weight for the roots were obtained following the same procedure as 

described above. 

—6—

DATA ANALYSIS 

For each test chamber, the following endpoints were calculated: 

• 14 Day Post-Gemination Survival ('/o) 

(Calculated as the number of seedlings alive at 14 day post germination divided by 

5) 

• Average Above Ground Shoot Mass (Wet) 

(Calculated as the total wet weight of the shoots divided by the number of 


• Average Above Ground Shoot Mass (Dry) 

(Calculated as the total dry weight of the shoots divided by the number of 


• Average Root Mass (Wet) 

(Calculated as the total wet weight of the roots divided by the number of seedlings 

harvested) 

• Average Root Mass (Dry) 

(Calculated as the total dry weight of the roots divided by the number of seedlings 

harvested) 

• Average Total Mass (Wet) 

(Calculated as the total combined wet weights of the shoots and roots divided by 


• Average Total Mass (Dry) 

(Calculated as the total combined dry weights of the shoots and roots divided by 


• Avenge Shoot Height 

(Calculated as the total combined height of the.tallest shoot of each seedling 


• Avenge Root length 

(Calculated as the total combined length of the longest root of each seedling 


Statistical analysis for each endpoint listed comprised of entering the data obtained from each 

replicate chamber of a test soil and comparing the results to the data from the replicate 

chambers of the laboratory control. Comparisons were made as a single tailed West, 

evaluating for statistically significant reductions from the control value, using CETIS version 

1.1.2. The Equal Variance t Two-Sample test was used When the assumptions of equality 

—7—

of variance or normality necessary for Equal Variance t Two-Sample test was not met, the 

Unequal Variance t Two-Sample test or Wilcoxon Rank Sum Two Sample test was used. 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

The endpoint data and the results statistical analysis are summarized in Table 2 below. The 

data represents the average value of the replicate chambers used in each test concentration. 

The results for sample J10DW4A indicated a statistically significant reduction in average 

stem (shoot) height, average root length, average above ground shoot mass (wet), average 

above ground shoot mass (dry), average root mass (wet), average root mass (dry), average 

total mass (shoots +roots, wet), and average total mass (shoots + roots, dry) when compared 

to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample J10DV4A indicated a statistically significant reduction in average 

stem (shoot) height, average root length, average above ground shoot mass (wet), average 

above ground shoot mass (dry), average root mass (wet), average mot mass (dry), average 

total [Hass (shoots + mots, wet), and average total mass (shoots + roots, dry) when compared 

to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample JlODTBA indicated a statistically significant reduction in average root 

length, and avenge mot mass (wet) when compared to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample J10LT5A indicated a statistically significant reduction in avenge stem 

(shoot) height, avenge mot length, avenge above ground shoot mass (wet), average above 

ground shoot mass (dry), avenge root mass (wet), avenge total mass (shoots + mots, wet), 

and avenge total mass (shoots + roots, dry) when compared to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample JIOJB8 indicated a statistically significant reduction in average stem 

(shoot) height and average mot length when compared to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample J10JB7 indicated a statistically significant reduction in avenge stem 

(shoot) height, avenge mot length, average above ground shoot mass (wet), and avenge 

above ground shoot mass (dry) when compared to the laboratory control. 

The results for sample JIOJH5 indicated a statistically significant reduction in average root 

length when compared to the laboratory control 

The results for sample J10JH8 indicated a statistically significant reduction in avenge mot 

length when compared to the laboratory control. 

Ile results for sample J10JH4 indicated a statistically significant reduction in average stem 

(shoot) height when compared to the laboratory control. 

—8—

ILaw2W ggggg 

IwwgW LIE ggg 

8i0.^X CR 

am.JS 

.. 

IWW ggggggg 

8 8 m 

4 ;iS 

IWWWW ggggg 

'w I 'w gulgul g g 

^ RH M tje 

1 1 51 15 

y 

b IW3EWgWg2g 

fill 

IWWWWw iuW-W 

ry momagww 

fi l t WW 4WWW gga, 

Sit, l I ;a3it.! 

fill 

12gggg2ggg 

-9-

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT 

I certify that this data package is in compliance with the Statement of Work, both technically 

and for completeness, for other than the conditions detailed above. Release of the data 

contained in this hand copy data package has been authorized by the Laboratory Manager or a 

designee, as verified by The following signature: 

—10—

APPENDIX A 

RAW DATA SHEETS 

-11-

Cr Vvmm•mmce.wMw^ IAy``^t 

7.0"P.44k w%SN•WNill/Y+bnbffwN•ftfw M{b1^1 •tNbpf DrhArNbwlt•ee 

R.P N A 3 Laf t ^/ w.YK,p t I 

Awl x 

S. N IA^4 

A•71ubc •S 4Sff N 7 /f 2- 

,l 

IT 

tbpr o 

lbplwit n r^ L^ Cr 

Awreta/K fea1lQ • ••wpw•e•b••1{w Ywry Ywr'1•Iewmlrwu4 /1{ • /Nb{•WiMwIMNeNU.1M•1 • /N/b•bW^f•^bTAw•^•w••L{!o • Iw•17b+b V•7wmY) 

NOTtw1w••a••s Ow•YMOawr•'••w^ 

tU/tY•A 

A"O * 

n.yabc 

fipl o 

ftp a x 

M A 

ftwl • 

Awbbc 

ItwbbO 

raplere 

Mt 4 Lw,le 

MA?NMpbNMY•ya•IwN 

Wwtli•wON{ _ 

7^^^^ •^ 

fauffotfASa fulo%tm7csr 

♦^ 

7rsbltlNe -t/` -0 ê 

D0^ •7 

D•/ t{-.•l^ Dw^-/^ .Dwss owls Oq{t^^ O•i7f^ W'u^ D9'ii ^jl.^^ 

' gIffol,11k Lab C"" (M"wm"qMwwW.W%cWylo%pwQ 

. 8"Mlowawmal of 

COW. R.FWAYE Rag1 

Nw 

PW" 

NY/t 

•r 

prrr 

Em• ptnn 

NIw• 19 ••1• 

rr Nb 

NtNw Ww 

ft•w• fi•wi 

Nr •I.r 

0•m1 0-" 

A 3 3 

CU*Vi . s S 

t N H06ft 

Ir+rr t•b'+M ••a •••^•f 

UI•••T'•••0 

tbw•N•Nwgt 

iWwNt{uN{p 

ft•ww•w 

14pw11oa1Wy'iC 

iWrNMeeb M N N•41p1 

0 3 3 

{ V Irv, I go I co S 

^^_ M^^ 2^=W^^^ 

7aAnPmT t.anrosr. 

(^GMn Nr fZL•n. N1I 

M•+.0 

mffll) . UAHIJ 

^^ m^ K= 

IT war ."TA .7MfflpYl9•mt•IS:Isî 

-T 

_al/^•li^'t 0=73" ^ 

I^_^_f;no mm 

Jll 

7llu{ 

lO Mwbto 

-!f)R*^'7^.7l^tst+fs•^w.n.^ Î'Rp!f ^^ 

I^î^^stwrr •t •1 1 . ^ ^ 

Ir.m.^c^ aa]y^ 

• î tt I ^Py^LaZ71 

^ 

au",PY 

{ y1 

All

--F^= 

2 'Zto l 

M %Q7 01 

0' b e' tv 1 0bh 

zb' zo Ft ti„1' 

x.001 ^.^ 4'•G' LOO! ° 

^Co l bn O 

lY IMW 1M.PMlW 

^^^ ^^ ^rMMMI 

LY..Rn)...R r°.P! vu W M.Yw9 " M...Y Y4P° •PH P'(.I p 

b ^ h,f 

O..M9+n 

'041 WIP{N 

19Y•MN 

wm 

7Y19• 

Poll 

IM.R 

RM.W 

.nwuRP{ 

ir3^lL'2/t^^F' :^ %.•nom r^ri+ 

off...P.M Mm PR'.MM MP! 

iN^1•M1••Y••^'1 

9.O•. YM.rY 

RPP.•q MPPYP.Y /YNPI 

• >PN11••Yr^.R 

s•P.wa 

awLn 

0YM9^.Y 

9rw•m 

vwoaw 

MuR.NPP..r Ml 

iI}MRW9P.^MIM 

• 0~11-.P..l 

PY 

b 

M{ 

. oYV...Y PPRl.1/Yr.. 

i.PRMP..9P.M... 

Prnpgl 

O.NeWM 

7.P1M,1 

•.MN.Y 

vY^YP.II 

n9^lIY°M.MI 

M'IMIIIY II..R •°'^RP.h9 

Arwm...M.(91.••7 ^rvPrYAMImw9r.P.10lP^sOV1 w'^bv 

py 

s w.v 

fow 79 

s •R P•Y 

vM. WY 

Ml.u..U.IP.^R.a•..Y W P. R.IM9.Y.M.1 .9.Y..°•Y..aPYY4.+PY.4 9Mw9^•PY.L.PL 

S Y SP ° 

s`- 

IuMR 

MCI 

.190d 84R4 

•'•'•d en.M 

qR PYP 

WIR WOIL 

PRKWAM9 9p 9 

t ummoilg(ne 

ew 

h z 1 • 

s 

99PR &O"d 

Y PIY. 

MMN wiN 

C •y 

Z 

z 1 

OYwL oY.M 

Y Y 

M.P./ MMLL 11V.7fw3v 

p.M^ 

—ZW- U Y0 -MnLM ^P140 --^N0 ^î1LW iL.G 

^L^^YmrY9 R.l '1• ^t1 wWaw..1.MMOwPn{MM Swa


Report Date: 19 Jul-06 9:15 AM 

Test Link- 14-2145-0937,1815C201osC 

Plant Bioassay - Chronfo CH2M Hi ll 


Test No: 08-9842-7406 Test Type: Plant Chmic Duration: WA 

Start Date: 05 Apr-W Protocol: ASTM E1963.02 (2002) Specter. Poll sandberp9 

Ending Date: Dll Water: Source: 

Setup Dale: 05 Apr-08 sling: 


Sample No: 18.1428-8954 Code: 81542-01 Client: 

Sample Date: 31 Oct-05 Material: Sol Proms 


Sample Ape: 156d 0h Station: 

Comments: J10DW4, E274801 


Analysts Endpoint NOEL LOFIL ChV PMSD Method 

12-6240-8747 %GerrNnauon 100 >100 WA 27.99% W9cozan Rank SumTvo,a 

07-35904024 Average Height (mm) 4100 100 WA 13.17% Equal Variance t Two•Sampie 

17-5063-9965 Average Length (mm) 4100 100 WA 21.87% Equal Variance tTwoSemple 

07-5263-2240 Average AO Wt (Wet, mg) 4 100. 100 WA 30.51% Equal Variance tTwoSample 

10.1671-4027 Avenge AG Wt (Dry, mg) < 100 100 WA 30.89% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

1651884194 Avenge Root WL (Wet, mg 4100 100 WA 3420% Equal Variance tTo-Sample 

10-0024.4642 Average Roct WL (Dry, rag) < 100 1D0 WA 33.67% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

095177-1719 Average Total Wt (Wel,mg 4100 100 WA 30.61% Equal Variance tTwoSanple, 

09-0040-8338 Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mg)



Cone-% Control Type Reps Mon Minimum Maximum SE SD " CV 

0 Artificial SdUS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 0.09798 021909 26.08% 

100 5 0.86000 0.60000 1.00000 0.08000 0.17889 20.33% 

Avenge Height (mm) Summary, 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Min mum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial WUS 5 75.780 81 84.400 3.9903 8.9226 11.77% 

100 5 55.52 45.3 65 3.6874 8.0217 14.19% 

Avenge Length (mm) Summary 

Cone-U. Control Typs Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOIU3 8 9122 50 117.40 11.4 25A91 27.94%. 

100 5 49.18 34.3 609 4.3468 9.7197 19.77% 

Avenge AG Wt (Wet, mu) Summary 

Cono-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 29.605 12833 36.826 4.3458 9.717 32.82% 

100 5 15.128 10208 221)5 21890 4.8501 32.07% 

Avenge AG Wt (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum . Maximum SE SD CV 

0 ArtfidalSOWS 5 4.98040 205668 626333 0.75579 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 270991 203800 3.92800 0.32563 0.72814 28.87% 

Avenge Rod Wt. (Wet, mg) Summary 


0 Artificial SotilS 5 36.878 13.317 46.99 6.1618 13.778 37.36% 

100 5 10.815 2812 18.833 28356 6.3408 58.63% 

Avenge Rod WL (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone•% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOUS 5 1.61720 0.64667 21)6331 025857 0.57819 35.75% 

100 5 0.94703 0.66400 IA1399 0.13741 0.30727 32A5% 


Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 AreBdal &03 5 6&484 2&150 8277 10.452 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 25.941 1&338 34.293 32461 72584 27.96% 


Cone•% Control Type Reps Mon Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOUS 5 6.57761 270335 832666 1.00653 225514 3429% 

100 S 3.65694 270200 534199 0.45998 1.02854 28.13% 


Report Date: 19 Jul•08 9.15 AM 

Test Link: 14.2145•6937B154201psC 

-i$- 

000-092-101-1 cEnsw v1.12reA Analyst- Approval_


%Germination Dotal 

Cone,% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 0.60000 1.00000 1.00000 • 0.60000 1.00000 

100 0.60000 1.00000 0.80000 1.00000 1.00000 

Average Height (mm) Dotal 

Cone,Y. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artifidal SOWS 61 84A000 75.8000 80.7 77 

100 45.3 63A 64.5 542000 65 

Average length (mm) Doing 


0 Artificial SOWS 50 117.400 99.8000 86.7 1022 

100 49.3 53.6 34.3 47A as 

Avenge AG Wt (Wet, mg) Dotal 



100 15.68 18.8920 10.8200 10206 2205 

Average Ala Wt (Dr% mg) Detail 

Cone,% Control Type Rap 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArtiBdal SoWS 2.05688 6.05200 5.26000 6.26333 5.17000 

100 2.70001 2.8600 229752 2.03800 3.92900 

Ave" Root Wt. (Wet, mg) Detail 

Cone-% Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rap 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 13.3167 452540 36.3420 46" 42AB8 

100 16.6333 15.6140 7.1752 9.49799 281199 


Cone,% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rip 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artifidal SOWS 0.64667 1.92800 1.52800 2.06331 1.92001 

100 0.99665 0.98800 0.67252 0.66400 1.41399 

Avenge Total Wt (Wet, mg) Dotal 

Cone,•A Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5' 

0 Ar9Bdal SoWS 25.1500 820800 68.0900 8277 73.328 

100 342933 325060 18.3375 19.704 25.862 

Average Total Wl (Dry, mg) Detail 


0 Artificial SOWS 2.70335 7.98000 6.78801 8.32888 MOM 

100 3.69688 3.7400 297003 270200 5.34199 

Page3of 3 


TeetUnic 14.2145.MVE1164201psC 

000-092-101-1 CETISw V1.12ml Analyst: 3•' Approval: 

-16-


Compa risons: Page 1 of 9 

Report Date: 19 Jul-W &14 AM 

Analysis: 12-6240-87478154201psC 

PlantBloasssy- Chronic CH2MHtil 

Endpoint Analysis Type • Sample Link Co ntrol Link Date Analyzed Version 

% Germination Cartpafton 14.21456937 14-2145.6937 19 Jut-W &14 AM CL"Sv1.12 

M ethod All H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic un it s ChV PMSO 

WBCOxon Rank Sum Two-Samp la C;, T Rank 100 >100 1 WA 27.99% 


Contrd vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P-Value Ties D"lon(0.05) 

-F Clal SoiUSedl 100 28.5 0.5000 3 . Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean 21cluarf, OF F StatisticP Value Dseision(MOS) 

Between OLN8873 0.004887 1 0.09 0.76896 Non•Slgrt antEfect 

Er ror 0.4233652 0.052921 8 

Total 0.42825247 0.578079 9 


Attribute Test statistic Critical P-Value Declslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ra tio F 1AS569 23.15450 0.71064 Equal Vatianaa 

DistAbuUm Shapiro-Wilk W 0.78085 0.00484 Nwl.normal Dis trWU6an 

Data Summe ry Original Data Transformed Data 

Conc-!. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Mtrkmum Maximum SO 

0 ArtifcialSoOIS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 021909 5.30000 2.00000 7.50000 3.01247 

100 5 0.86000 0.60000 1.00000 0.17889 5.70000 2.00000 7.50000 2.56418 

Graphics 

at 

2. 

! r r 

as 0', 

f ' 

o ; 

Oa • i 

r 

0.1 -^ 

3. 

r 

• • ' r 

r 

'r • • • 

•;• • 

a0 ' 

0 100 -Le -Ls -1.0 -44 04 03 14 u 14 

C0M-% Itankits 

-17- 

000-092.101-1 CETISta v1.12rev1 AnalystÂpprovals_ 

1 

r


Comparisons: • Page 2 of 9 

Report Date: 19JuW6 &14 AM 

Analysis: 0735W202418154201 psC 

Plant Bloassay • Chronic CH2M H•II 

Endpoint Analysis Type SampleUnk ControlUnk DateAnslyced Version 

. Average Height (mm) Comparison 14.2145.6937 14-2145$937 19 JUW6 8:14 AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t TwoSample C> T Untrarxlormed c100 100 NIA 13.17% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Valus MSD Declsiorl(0.0 

lWi1iclal SoWSedl 10D ISM 1.85955 0.0035 9.97796 _ Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squat" Mean Square DP F Statistic P-Value Decislon(0.05) 

Between 927.3691 9273691 1 12.88 0.00709 Slgnlfirant Effect 

Error 575.1138 719795 8 

Total 150320508 999.34858 9 


Attribute Tesl Statlstle Crltieal P Value Declsion(0.01) 


DISWIxiflon Shapiro-Wilk W 0.90440 024472 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Data Tra nsformed Date 

Cone-*A Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SoBIS 5 75.780 61 84A 59226 

100 5 56.52 453 65 50217 

Graph" 

< 

r 1 

1 

t 

4 0 

t • • i 1 

0 

o 

con*. Y 

rro 

i • 

I. 

1 

1 • 

I 

I 

I 

1 

• I 

1 

I 

-24 -1•s 4A as as ss fA u 

aankas 

000-092-1014 CETiSW W.1.2ev1 Analyst Approvat 

1 

I 

• 

6 

-18-

CUTS An alysis Detail 


Report Dote: 19 J" 9.15 AM 

'Analysis: 17.5063-9905815420, DsC 

Plant Bloassay • Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpolnt Analys is Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analysed Ve rs ion 

Average Length (mm) Comparison 14-2145-6937 14,2145{937 19Jul-W g:15AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Tox)c UniteChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-SampleC > T Untranclommed 4100 100 WA 24.87% 


Control rs Cons% Statistic Critical PValue MSO Decislon(0.05) 

Ar tificial So0lSed 100 3A4744 1.85955 0.0044 226872 Significant ENed 

ANOVATabfe 

Source Surn of Squares Mean Squa re OF F Statistic P Value Decislon(O.W 

Between 4422609 4422809 1 11.68 0.00873 slgni ticad Md 

Error2976.98 3721225 - 8 

Total 7399.58887 4794.7314 9 


Attribute Test sta9•tie Critical PVakm Osclslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ra ti o F 697786 23.15450 0.08650 Equal variances 

Distribution Shapko-W0c W 0.91185 0.29394 Normal Disftudon 


Cone•% Co ntrol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Arg6dal SOWS 5 9122 50 117.4 25.491 

100 5 49.18 34:3 609 9.7197 

Graphics 

s r rr 

a ^ 

a 

10 r • 

r 

g 

3 ^• 

s m 

0 

f 

o too ^ 

.tA 

r 

r 

' 

r 

r 

r 

m 

.LS •t, os e4 as u >, . u 

000-092-101.1 CEnsw % 1.12reA Anayst b" Approvak 

sankP.S 

-19-


Comparisons: 

Page4of 9 

Report Date: 19 J" 8:14 AM 

Analysts: 07-5263.224118154201pSC 

Plant B ioassay-Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unit Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Conganeon 14.2145.8937 14-2145 .8937 19 JuRS 8:14 AM CETISV1.12 


Equal Variance t Two-SampleC>T Untranskxmed 0 00 100 NIA 3031% 


Control vs Cono-% Statist ic Critica l P•Value MSD Decisbn(0.03) 

Artificial SalVSedl 100 2.98135 1.85955 0.0085. 9.03149 SlpNticent Effect 

ANOVATable 

SourceSum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value Dedsion(0.05) 

Between 524.168 524.165 1 8.39 0.01756 SlgnMpntEffect 

E rr or 471.7735 5&97168 8 

Total 995939484 583.1377 9 

ANOVA Assump tlone 

Attribute,Test StaWtle Critical P-Value, D•cislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ra ti o F 4.01387 23.15450 020694 Equal var iances 

Distnbueon Shapro-WNt W 0.85882 0.07350 Normal Dis tribu tion 


Conc-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean M inimum Maximum SD 

0 Arifcial So llIS 5 29.005 121 33 36.826 9.717 

100 5 15.126 10205 2205 4.8501 

Graphics 

31- r 

g 1 ' • 

r 

1 r 1 

•r• 

1 r 

• r 

1 

0 

0 

cant-% 

r 

i 

r 

r 

r 

• r r 

r 

100 - •Oa •la •le -0f e,0 OS >d 1.f 

000-092-101-1 CETIS % %1.12revi Analyat `5" Appr oval- 

tantrib 

>A 

^^



Report Date: 19 Ju1418 &14 AM 

Analysts: 10.1671.4027Bl54201peC 

Plant Bloasssy• Ch ronic CH20111 H01 

Endpolnt Analys is Type Sample t.lnk Cont rol 1Jnk Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Compa rison 14-2145.6937 14-214546937 19 JuIM &14 AM CETISY7.12 

Method AN H Data T ra nsform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C > T t)ntransformad X100 100 WA 30.09% 


Con ol vs Cono•% Statis tic Critical P-Value 111130 DsCWon(0.05) 

ArRZW tr SdySadl 1D0 2.73162 1.839SS 0.0129 1.53203 SOtiliant ESeo 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares M ea n Square DF F Sta tisticP-Value Declsion(0.03) 

Between 1266151 1288181 1 7.48 0.02575 Signiiant Effect 

6ror 13.57522 1.898902 ' a 

Total 262370281 14.358715 9 


Attribute Test Sta ti s ti c Cr itical P-Value DeGs4on(0.01) 

VarWmes Variance Ra tio F 5AO119 23.15450 0.13118 Equal Variances 

Distribu ti on Shapto-WOk W 0.88077 0.07792 Normal DIsYlbuBorn 

Data Summary Original Dab Transformed Dana 

Cones% Con trol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

a Artificial SOWS 5 4.96040 205885 828333 1.69222 

100 5 270991 203800 3.92800 0.72814 

G raph ics 

LO 21 

aas th 

a CA 

e r 

B 63 e r 

r 

< ' r 

62 

0.1 

U 

000-M-101-1 

o tao 

. cero-% 

CUP 

ao •u •>.o -is ae as u u 

r 

' 

' 

r 

r 

Rank" 

^' 

CETISw v1.12mA Analyst Approval: 

• 

• 

2a 

-21-



Report Dale: 19 Jul-08 8:14 AM 

-Analysis: 15:5186-41MI54201psC 

Plant Bloassay• Chronic C112111 HIP 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sempie Unk Control Unk Date AnalyzedVstabn 

Average Root WL (Wet, mg) Comparison 14-2145-6937 14-2145 937 19 JCETISvl.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform We NOEL LOEL ToV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untlansfonrrsd 4100 100 342M 


Control vs Cone-Y. Statistic Critical P-Value MSD DeeWlon(0.05) 

Artificial SalfSem 100 3.84256 1.85955 0.0025 12.6129 Sipdmt Ef ed 

ANOVATabls 

Source Sum of Squares Maan Square DF F Statistic P Valve Decwon(0.05) 


Error • 920.1185 115.0148 6 

Total 281&34033 18132366 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical PValue Detlslon(0.01) 


Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.88147 0.07941 Normal Disribution 


Cone.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SONS 5 36.878 13.317 4&99 13.778 


Graphics 

gt to, 

t 

r 

t 

s ' 

s tm 40 45 -14 4a GA e; to is to 

conch► Rankas 

000092-101.1 CETIS TM v1.12mvl An*sC Approval: 

r 

'r • . 

r 

t 

r 

e . 

—22-

CUIS Analysis Detail 

Comparisons: Page T of 9 

Report Date: 19 Ju4088:14 AM 

Analysis: 104024-464218154201psC - 

Plant Sloassay- Chronic CH2M Hit 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link ControlUnk Date Anatycsd Version 

Average Root WL (Dry, mg) • Comparison 14-21458937 14-21458937 19 Ju" 8:14 AM CETISW.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta=EL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untranatonned


Comparisons: Pagead 9 


Analysts, 093177-17198154201psC 


Endpoint • Analysis Type Sample link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Comparison 14-21456937 14-2145$937 19Jul-06&14AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Dab Transform Zete I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t TWo-Sample C>T Unbansformed I



Report Dab: 19 Jul-05 8:14 AM 

Analysis: 094W04338IB154201psC 

Plsnt Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Nil 

Endpoint Analysis Type SamploUnk ControlUnk DateAnslysed Version 

Average Total Wt (OVA mg) Comparison 14.2145-i7 14-21456937 19.kd-06 &14 AM CETISvl.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic U nite ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance It C>T Untransformed c100 100 WA 31.34% 


Control vs Cono-% Statistic C rit ic 

al P•Value MSD Deelalon(0. 

ArbBClal Sofysod 100 2.63486 1 1.85955 04150 2.06120 Sig nificant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Souris Sum of Squares Mean SquatsOF F Statistic P-Value Deelslon(0.05) 

Between 21.32578 21.32578 1 6.94 042995 SigriBnMEtkct 

Error 2457421 3.071776 8 

Total 45.8999862 24.397555 9 

ANOVAAssumption 

Attribute Test Statistic critical P-Value Dacklon(0.01) 

Variances Va riance Ratio F 4.50730 23.15450 0.15749 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapbo-WA W 0.86949 0.09850 Normal Distribu tion 

Data Summary Original Data TransfonnM Data 

Cone% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 A rtifi cial Soils 5 &57781 2.70335 8.32808 225514 

1D0 5 3.65694 2.70200 5.34199 142854 

Graphics 

Le I 

^. 

r 

e 

_ as 

7i 

^ 

r 

a 

CA ----------- ------------r 

^ os 

a 

oa ^ 

o tm 

coot-Mr 

3 

-LO -u -14 m o4 os u u 

000-092-101-1 CE71Sm vl.1.ZvA Analyst QF— Approval: 

r 

nanWb 

u 

-25-

i^YZ7 ^%1e7^ 

IIL, IEA ^/f I îiaîi^fi^ 

v/SiYêll/CL1a^-3ti4^ 

— 

.egipw.Pp^wP.wa Pl.l 

NOOMIMW oom. 

NW^F•r.ar 

Iwia^9NPWSPPM. 

aee+nPro^n 

âgMy 

' awry 

]may 

ewdm 

^ vwdro 

(PMA--" 

.r^ww.w PwN lql 

sAI.MPary ^.wwN 

NPw AP/MrlwNw.1 

sA4lweu¢r^w.w 

9tl 

awga 

]wry 

•^M.0 

vwwNy 

.a^rjwe races. 

MrlPrrele tirprllwrrr^Îal rrq ^.s.PM^1w^/I.Y.MOWD >•W W'wMI 

'E '12. 3rww 

^ q,r alaerrry 

awry 

vwry 

Mti Î^w'^. IwwltN.MlrNwfYi^041 /P^V^Mt yw.r^„wJ ^k01 

S S° t 1 n 

ebrMM IM.Ir 04.a 

êrws 

'^yyÎ 

bow 69.0 

&0-0 

wro Pl 

awrlr 

kwo 

40 

wrn uravn 

•u°r QWi 

wra ^wru 

P4^ 

wrn 

Dn 

rb arin4ynaw..:e 

Q• 4 1snI o • L aan rqe 

I' •/I ; T" '- 4 -5iuO âro ^ uro ^^ ar+° ' —^TrNaa ^N M+â^^ ^nr° f^ euw 

^_ •rW MMI>•rl PyrypM^rlaarOwy\wwM irrO 

V ' 19]1 WMOtl9 C4VND3(T1B



Report Date: 19 JW-06 9.,W AM 

Test Link: 04-8170530118154202psC 

Plant Bioassay- Chronic CH2M Hill 

Test No: 054800.9219 Test Type: Rant Chronic Duration: WA 

Start Date: 05Apr-06 Protocol: ASTM E19M42 (2002) Specks: Poe sandtaryA 

Ending Date: D8 Water: Souroe: 

Setup Date: 05 Apr-05 Brine:• 


Sample No: 07-3307-9513 Code: 81542-02 Clktd: 

Sample Date: 08 Nov-05 Material: Son Pro)ect: 

Receive Dalr, Source: Hanford 

Sample Age: 1484 Oh Station: 

Comments: J10DV4, J1ODV3, J10DV8, J10DV7, J100V8. 

MOM 


Analysis ' Endpoint NOEL LOEL ChV PMSD Method 

18-9781.9133 % Germination 100 > 100 ' WA 3224% Equal Variance t Two sampb 

094520-4003 Average Height (mm) -4100 100 WA. 1324% Equal Valence ITwoSanpk 

10-74954983 Average Length (mm) -4100 100 WA 23.60% Equal Variance l Two•Sample 

06.22444005 Average AG Wt (We%mg)


% Germination Summary - 


0 Artificial SOWS 5 O."M 0.60000 1.00000 0.09798 0.21909 26.08% 

100 5 0.60000 OA0000 1.00000 0.10954 024495 40.82% 

Average Height (mm) Summary . 


0 Aaficlel sows 5 75.760 61 84AOO 3.9903 8.9228 11.77% 

too 5 44-580 32 54.700 3.6342 5.1263 1623% 


Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE so CV 

0 Arti6dal SoWS 5 9122 50 117.40 11.4 25.491 27.94% 

100 5 2926 22.5 33.5 2.0131 4.5014 1538% 

Average AO Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 


0. Artificial SoWS 5 29.605 12.1133 36.826 4.3456 9.717 32.82% 

100 5 5.7955 6.6434 9.95 0.5739 12833 1459% 


Cone-0.4 Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 ArtiklalSoiVS 5 4.96040 2.05668 626333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 1.86100 120667 252496 025758 0,57593 30.95% 


Report Date: 19 JuW6 9:08 AM 

TomLWC 04.8170.530118154202osC 

Average Root WL (Wet, mg) Summary . 

Coro-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 36.878 13.317 46.99 61616 13.778 3726% 

100 ' S 8.8630 3.9433 18A6. 22808 5.1000 5754% 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Summary 


0 Artificial SoW3 5 1.61720 0.64687 246331 025857 0.57819 3575% 

100 ,5 0.98446 0.57660 1.33667 612454 027M 2829% 

Average Total Wt (Wet. mg) Summary 

Cone-% ControiType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Ara6aal SoIVS 5 66.464 26.150 82.77 10.452 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 17.659 11.000 25-575 2.6359 5.894 3338% 

Average Total Wl (Dry, mg) Summary 

Con" Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 6.57761 2.70335 8.32666 1.00853 2.25514 3429% 

100 5 2.114346 1.78333 3A7495 0.30938 0.69180 24.31% 

000-092.101-1 CETis 1Y v1.12MVI An*stt Pr" Approval. 

-28-




0 ArBficial S0613 0.60000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 1.00000 - 

100 0.40000 0.60000 0.40000 0.00000 1.00000 

Average Height (mm) Deta9 


0 Artificial SOWS 61 64A000 75.8000 80.7 77 

100 45.5 54.7000 443 32 46.2000 



0 AN6cial SOWS 50 117.400 99.80o0 8&7 1022 

100 33.5 27 225 32.3 31 

Average AG Wt (Wet. mg) DOW 


0 Artificial S01VS 123333 38.8280 31.748 35.78 30.84 

100 9.94995 &75332 9.11502 8.64335 9.51602 

Average AG WI (Dry. mg) Detail 

Conc-% Con rol Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep s 

0 ArOflcial 801113 205688 6.05200 52WW 826333 5.17000 

100 252498 1.38332 234003 120887 1.85000 

Avenge Root WL (Wet. mg) Defog 

Coro-Ye Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArtifidalSdU3 13.3167 452.540 30.3420 4899 42468 

100 10.0450 3.94334 1&48 4.35887 9.51001 

Average Root WL (Dry. mg) Detail 

Conc-•b Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArBfidal SOUS 0.64687 1.92800 1.52800 208331 1.92001 

100 0.94998 1.33887 1.11499 037668' 0.94401 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Defog 


0 Artl6dal SOWS 26.1500 620800 6&0900 6277 73.328 

100 19.995 126985 253750 11.0000 19.0280 

Average Total Wt ( Dry, mg) Detail 

Cone-Y. Conrrot Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep S 

0 Artificial SOWS 270335 7.98000 &78801 8.32666 7.09000 

100 3A7495 271999 3.45502 1.78333 279401 


Report Date: 19.1" 9:06 AM 

Test Unic 04.8170.53018154202psC 

000-092-101-1 CEns r v1.1.2ev1 Analyst 2s- Apprmt 

-29

CECIS Analysis Detail 

Compa risons: Pape 1 of 9 

Repo rt Date: 19 JuW6 8:27 AM 

Analysis: 16-9781-01331B154202psC 

Plant Bioassay- Chrome • C112M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Cordrol L1nk Date Analyzed Version 

% Gorminabon Comparison 04.8170.5301 0481705301 19 AO-06 6:27 AM CETISV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Tramfomt Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Va ri ance t T o Sample C > T Angular (Consoled) 11100 >100 1 WA 3224% 


Control vs Conc-Y. Statistic critical P-Value MSD D•elsion(0.06) 

Artificial SodlSedl 100 1.60156 1.85955 04740 0.30679 Non 210cent Eflecl 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of 3quar•s Mean Square OF F Statistic P Value Dsclalon(0.05) 

Between 0.1745378 0.174538 1 257 0.14792 No"lgn6icanl Effect 

Error 0.443657 0.068046 8 . 

Total 0.71800347 02425835 9 

ANOVA Assumptions' • 

Attrlbut• Test Statieno Crhfaf P-Value D•olslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratb F 1.15127 23.15450 0IM70 Equal Variances 

Distdbu6on Shaplro-Wik W 0.89943 - 021598 Norval Disbtbut on 

Data Summary Original Data Transform ed Data 

Corns% Control Type CountMean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Avfi6dal SOWS 5 0.84000 0.60000 14OODO 021909 1.16160 0.88608 1.34528 025152 

100 S 0.6WW OA0000 I== 024195 039738. 0.68472 1.34528 0.28987 

Graphics 

L 1 

1 • 

•' a 

w 

w 

w 

w 

9$ w 1 

evra"r 1 

1 

aw ----- ------- 1•------------- 

1 

0.1 

• • 

1 

1 

^ • 1 

o Lao 

conc.% 

as •Ls -Lo oa ca w to 14 

000.092-101.1 CETIS^ 0 .1.2-VA Analyst ^` Approval 

1 

' 

RWARA 

Lo . 

-30-


Comparisons: Papa 2 of 9 

Repo rt Data: 19 Jui-06 827 AM 

Analysis: 09$520-400381542upsc 

Plant Blosssay • Chronic CH2M NO 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Daft Analysed ' Ve rs ion 

Average Height (mm) Camparlsort 04.6170-6301 0441705301 19 JuWM &27 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Twdc Unlb CW PMSD 

Equal Variance t Tw o-Sample C a T Untransfamled


Compa risons: Pape lot 1 

Report Date: 19 Jul-W 9:00 AM 

Analysts: 10.749549831B154202psC 

Plant Bloassay, . Chronic CH2M Hill 


Average Length (mm) Compa rison 04.8170.5301 04.81704301 19 JW-06 9.08 AM CflTISv1.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta NOEL- LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance I Two-Sample C>T Untransfarmed


Compar isons: Page 4of 9 

Report Date: 19Jui-08827AM 

Analysis: 08-224440051s154202psC 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic C142111 Him 

Endpoint Analysis Type Semple Link Cont rol Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Comparison 04$1705301 04-0170-5301 19 JuWS 827 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Wllcoxon Rank Sum Two-Sample C> T Rank


Comparisons; Page 5of 9 

Report Dab: 19 Jul-06 827 AM 

Analysis: 164673.2573lB 154202psC 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic CH2M Hip 

Endpoint Ana lysis Type Sampia Unk Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, nip) Comparison 048170.5301 04-8170.5301 19 Jul46 8:27 AM CETIS0.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta INOEL LOEL Toxic Un it s ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untramtomled I c100 100 WA 2997% 


Control vs Cone-% sta ti 

stic Critical • P Value MSD Dselslon(0.00 

/u kW SaVSela 100 3.8771 1.85955 0.0023 1.48655 Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P Value Decislon(0.05) 

Between 24.01578 24.01576 1 15.03 0.00489 Slgndcant Effe ct 

Flmr 12.78125 1.597850 a 

TOW 36.7970295 25.613437 9 

ANOVAAssuriptlons 

Attribute Test Sbtlstic Critical 1A-Value DaNslon(0.01) 


Distribution Shap iro-WR W 0.85010 0.05825 Normal Disb'bupan 

Data Summary Original Dab Transformed Data. 

Con" Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 4.96040 2.05668 826333 1.69222 

100 5 1.86100 1.20667 2.52496 0.57593 

Graphic 

to 

t^ U 

el• 

^. 0.0 .......... y. . .............. 

03 

1 

1 

• • 

1 

Q.+ ^ 

1 

W 

a 

0 

Cam-% 

7S 

too •20 -Ls -is 43 Lc O.S 14 13 

066-092-101-1 CEflSw%1.12mA Analyst Zv- Approval: 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Raegb 

70 

-34-


Comparisonw. Page aof 9 

Report Date: 19 Jul-W 8 .27 AM 

Analysis: 03.2953 .521 5181 5 4 2 02psC 

Plant 81oassay • Ch ronic CH2M 141 11 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Link Control Link Data Analyzed Version 

Averao Rod Wt. (Wei m9) Co"WAson 04-81705301 04.8170-5301 19 JuF06 8:27 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta INOEL LOFL Toxic Un its CIN PMSD 

Equal Variance l Two-SampleC>T Unbansfonned 4100 100 WA 33.13% 

Group Comparisons - 

Cont rol vs Cone-% Statbtk Critical P-Value MSD De cision(0.05) 

ArtiBOal So81Se® 100 428398 1.85955 OD014 12.2176 SlOtIant Etfed 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squa res Mean SquareDF F Stat istic P-Value Deoblon(0.05) 

Between 1982.119 1962119 1 1&18 0.00275 SipniBcanlEffect 

Error. 863.3456 107.9182 8 

Total 2825.4645 2070.0372 9 


Attribute Test Statistle Crhleal P-Value Deolslon(0.01) 


Di3trib116onShaptro.W9k W 0.84834 0.05551 Normal Distribution 


Cone .% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 ArOclal SOUS 5 38.878 13.317 46.99 13.778 

100 S &8630 3.9433 18AS 51000 

Graphics 

t 1 

e 

n t 1 

1 

^ • 

1{ 

1 

G 

1 1 

1 

• 

• • 

31 t 

1 

l 

1 

0 • 

1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 

• 1 

0 too - -1A -Ls -L0 -03 OA OS Le Ls 2.0 

c•r1 % Iunidla 

000-092-101-1 CETIS° v1.12rev1 Ana lyst: Zrf Approvak 

1 

1 

1 

1 

-35-


Comparisons: 

Page Tot 9 

Report Date: 19 Jul-W 827 AM 

Analysis: 14-T385-57MI54202psC 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2 111 HIM 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analyzed Ve rsion - 

Averape Root WL (Dry, m9) Compenson 04e170-53111 0481705301 19 Jut-06 827 AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CIN Ps13D 

Equal Variance It C>T Untransfomted




Analysis: 12-4548-8681/8154202psC 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CH2M H51 

Endpoint Analysis Type Semple Unk Control Un it 

Data Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wek mg) Comparison 04-0170-5301 04-81705301 19 J" &27 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it e CAV PMSD 

Equal Vadancel Two-Sample C>T Untrandoffned 11,100 100 WA 30.15% 

GroupComparlsons 

Control vs Cone!A Statistic Cr itic al P Value MSO Deelston(0A3) 

Ar tificial SaSed 100 4.32971 1.85955 0.0010 20.0438 SgdBcard Effect 

ANOVA Tabte 

SourceSum of Square Man Square OF F Statis tic P-Value Deoislon(0.03) 

Between 5959.718 5959.718 1 20.52 0.00193 SlgN6rantEStect 

E rr or 2323.673 290.4594 8 . 

Total 8283.39282 6250.1772 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Cr itical P-Value Dedsion(0.01) 

Variances Va riance Ra tio F 15.72240 23.15450 0.02060 Equal Va riances 

Disbftbon Shapiro-Wilk W 0.80564 0.011198 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Oripinai Data Transformed Data 

Cone-Y. Control Type Count Man Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar tificial SONS 3 66.484 26.13 82.77 23.370 

100 3 . 17.859 11.000 25.575 5.&A 

Graphics 

1 as 1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

I 

1 

q 

^^ 

1 

e ------------*..P 1 

1 

------------ -- 

1 

• • 1 1 

t 1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 1 

1 

I 

° o no Te -u -u -U m 4s U !S 1 0 

cwe % tlinfltl 

000492-101.1 CEMI vl.12ravl Analyst j Approval: 

-37-


Compa ri sons: pop 9of 9 

Report Date: 19 Jul ON B27 AM 

Analysis: 13-5421,2953f B154202psC 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic CH2M HIB 

Endpoint Analysis TYps Sample link Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Compa rison 04$170.5301 04-01703301 19.0-06 827 AM CET1Sv1.12 

Method Ali H Data Transform Zeta NOEL sea LOEL Tone Un its ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance tTwoSw" C>T, Untransformed

ELUEARA760ROWrATl8T 

are wrMgm.cmm..nmbalcjre TrIfMDrc 

W^ Wu^ WH_.oui_ Wa Wi. Wx. W77 33 E+- 

IaDb 59•+f• NW OD 

fl ee•oe pumliuYD ql 

caw P.0%"n Q wane 

"A 

w w 

Wro arw 

E •a ww 

W" own. r«a na m 

w w w w 

MO n•w Mre•e pr" 

• 03 .^ 

D 

teâen rsa^sT. uaenwsn 

^'° 

1 l.(a.u.w 

l anew 

vr+W ar•a 

1 (4 . 5- 

v to I 1< I 

taer^'•++•+•o.+re e.rew+y.reo.n r.swr^M.+..e rr•..w... ► Dw•reN.rr^.a 

Paean• S L : 1 W 

Rueurt ^^^ U 

((^^ 

nrw. 

N .na•W 

-. s s ' 

nal 

c0+..en n•. 

^^ 

_ Ropka%4 ^g Cr 

N•rwCre Gaa Nl `N..ei.reYmrl.emwm, a.r /ry•er...mrma, e4 • a NYe. prm PN•t M Nma.. wr..arMe4•^Nrwwl.vax..NOl. e...wM+OS 3mÌ 

ra.r!.'.ra.werra Drr1.Nm1....•..rl 

R./ie1.1 LLoy Lr ,all .3 ^ f (S l• ' 

Run... 3 l ti (i. I L y [r «./ f x F I MA CT 

Rudmc (cS M b' 

^{anYO C/ Ly (r^ I L. u / (3 SI, 

Runr^ "Z L? !r^ 2 ^ (r 

u..wsmww•.e 

ldMFa11^11Nrdtrm4+• 

w.u•eDrN w.ye 

Tw mrarraê. 

De.rr.mNl 

Drw" " y.wr[.t 

n. eum• 

^R Wdf.e 

TdW. of aimme•ea..alge 

bl 'da ]N6 t• M 

L-7 B& 13 

'77 r. .. v9 f3(i • . 

& .. Sì 62 

.1 6% r. °G 

.1 L9 66 

lmTw Nt w wl M 

w cti70. t U 104 5 • 

e /00, 12J. OZ2 

i a lot-2 joq L IeB 

D to 4 0 .b 

D OG2, iD0 7'5' 

^*''7 E*E^r!'^ ^'7'rr7 ^wû^ 

SON MOOREMISCAM 

tmt.n waw w 

?46. S o fas 

ova o O.ta^ 

3.9 0 4.9. Ed to 

/oaa.s Its 11033-00 

El 1 1031.3 

ONE ^-Mmmoow—Nim 

oil



Report Date: 19 JuM 11.05 AM 

Ted unin 11.40253o121B1S42o3paG 


Teat No: 16-813"754 Test Type: Punt Chronic Duration: WA 

Start Date: OS Apr•08 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Species: Poo sanceergil 


Setup Date: 05 Apr-06 Brine•. 

Comments: reralwlated Height and Length data Juy 19, 2008 

Sample No: 15.5457.5144 Code: 31542-03 ClienE 

Sample Date: 14 Nov-OS Material Sob Project: . 



Comments: J10DT8, E283101 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL ChV PMSO Method 

0938993413 %Germination 100 >1DO WA 20.96% Equal VariancetTwSafple 

167824-0721 Average Height (mm) 100 >100 WA t 14.80% Equal Valance tTvoSample 

17$7668021 Average leng th (mm) 4100 100 WA 2533% Equal Variance tTwoSample 

01-03960874 Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) 100 3.100 WA 3526% Equal Variance tiro eAmple 

0952166543 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) too >100 WA 35.3B% Equal Varia ce t TvoSampie 

07-6762-M12 Average Root WL (Wet mg 4100 100 WA • 36.01% Equal Variance tTwo carple 

1 g-3047.53S0 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 ).100 WA 39.40% Equal Variance tTwo-Sample 

17-9521-7694 Average Total Wt (Wet, m9 100 >100 WA 33.37% Equal Variance lTvo.Sample 

09-31249971 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 >1()() WA 3595% Equal Varlanoe t Two-Sample 

000-092-101.1 CETISmv1.12rev1 Analyst 3- Approvak 

40

COS Test Summary 

Y. Germination Summary 

Conc Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD • CV 

0 Artificial SoiVS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 0.09798 021909 26.08% 

100 5 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00% 

Average Height (mm) Summary • 

Cone-, Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD cv 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 75.780 61 84A00 3.9903 8.9228 11.77% 

100 5 89.320 56200 77.6 45213 10.11 14.58% 


Cone-'b Control Type Rqm Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 ArOcIal SONS 5 9122 50 117.40 11A 25A91 27.94% 

100 5 5&780 43.8 72A00 4.9457 11.059 19AS% 

Average AC Wi (Wet, mg) Summary 


0 Am dal SOWS 5 29.605 12.833 38.826 4.3458 9.717 32.WA 

100 5 22.778 12718 30.848 35531 7.9451 3498% 


Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE so CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 4.96040 2.05688 626333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 S 3.57920 200800 4.85801 0.56377 1.26063 3522% 

Average Root WL (Wei, mg) Summary 

Cone-79 Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Artlficiai SONS 5 3&878 13.317 46.99 8.1616 13.776 37.36% 

100 5 21.691 11.818 31.752 3.6095 8.0711 37.21% 

Average Root WL (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone'/6 Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 1.51720 0.64667 2.06331 025857 0.57819 35.75% 

100 5 1.36240 0.81600 209200 022487 0.50283 3691% 


Cone-*/. Control Typo Reps M ea n Minimum Maximum SE SO CV 

0 ArtiSGal SOWS 5 66.464 25.150 5277 10.452 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 44.409 24.534 62800 • 7.1169 15914 35.79% 


Cono.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 A ACA SOWS 5 657761 2.70335 6.32666 1.00853 225514 3429% 

100 5 4.94160 282400 6.94801 0.77480 1.73251 35.06% 

Pape 201 3 

Report Date: 19 JuW51Ua5 AM 

Test Link: 114025J0127B154203psC 

-41- 

000-092401-1 CEnsw v1.12r&A Analyst a Appmvah-




0 Arbfi SOWS 0.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 1.00000 

100 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 tA000b 


Cone-9. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 • Rep 5 

0 Artificial SONS 61 84A000 75.8= 80.7 77 

100 76.4000 77.6 60.6 75AM 5620110 



0 ArUfidal SoiUS So 117.400 99.8000 86.7 1022 

100 86.8 61.5 49.4000 72A000 43.8 

Average AG Wt Pat. mg) Detail 

Conc.-/. - Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rap 4 Rep 5 

0 Ar"dal SOWS 12.8333 38.8260 31.748 35.78 30.84 

100 292M 24.71 16.386 30.848 17718 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) Detail 

Cone-V6 Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Artificial SoIUS 2.05668 6.05200 526000 626333 &17000 

100 4AB201 4.06799 2.48201 4.85801 2.00600 




100 28.2300 24A32 18.2260 31.7520 11.8160 


Cone-PA Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rap 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 

0 Artificial SOM 0.64667 1.92800 1.82800 2.05331 1.92001 

100 1.38401 1.54200 0.97799 2.09200 0.81600 


Cone•% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rap 3 

0 ArU6dai SdVS 2&1500 82.0800 6&0900 6217 73.328 

100 54.4580 49A42 31.612 82.8000 24.5340 



0 mficial Sows 2.70338 7.96000 &76801 6.32660 7.09000 

100 8.86802 5.81000 3A6000 694801 2.82400 


Report Date: 19 JJ,4611:05 AM 

Teat Llnk: 114025301218154203paC 

000-092-101-1 Censor v1.12revl AWmwal: 

-42-


Plant 

ant 

Comparisons: Pala 1 of 9 

Report Date: 19 JuWS 8:32 AM 

Analysis: 09J8W3413f8154203psC 

- Chrordc CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Un it Control Link Date Anslysed Version 

%Gemdnation Comparison 114025.3012 11.4025.3012 19JuW&31AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Untie CAV PMSO 

Equal VadanoetTwo-Sample C>T Angular (Corrected) 11100 >100 1 WA 20.98% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Decislon(O.0 5) 

ArtifiGal SoiVSedl 100 -1.633 1.85955 0.9294 020917 Non Sigh =cat Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P Vokre Decision(OA 

Between 0.084348 OD84348 1 2.67 0.14111 NonSlyniricanlEfket 

Error 02WO439 0.031630 8 

Total 0.33739194 0.1159785 9 

ANOVAAssumplions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Deelsion(0.01) 

Variances Modified Leven 4.80000 1125862 0.05984 Equal Variances 

DlsMbubon Shapiro-wik W 0.81415 0.02153 Normal Disbbulbn 


ConoYa Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SorIVS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 021909 1.16160 0.88808 1.34528 0.25152 

100 5 1X)0000 1.00000 1.00000 0.00000 1.34520 1.34528 1.34528 0.00020 

Graphics 

• 

0.9 ass r 

ae 

oj 

------- -----------------Ta:aTa 

a 

w 

at 

0s 

0 101 

3 

a 

Iz 

Los r 

.ys -u -y0 as a0 as i0 is 

COW .% 

Rantdb 

000-092.101-1 CEnSw %1.1.2W Analyst °n Appova t: 

u 

-43-


[pl ant 


Repo rt Data: 19 Jld-08 8.32 AM 

Analysis: 157624.onviii 54203p9c 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Co ntrol Unk Date Analysed Version 

Average HeVA (mm) Comparison 11.40253012 11 .4025.3012 19 Jul-06 8:31 AM CETISr1.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL IAEL Toxic Un its CAV PMSD 

Equal Valance t Two-Sample C>T Unlransfomled 1100 >100 1 WA 14.80% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P Vatue MSO Dedsion(0.05) 

Arti ficial So01Se4 100 1.07125 1.85955 0.1577. 112137 NonSlpriOcant Effect 

ANOVA Tabl* 

Source Sum of Squa res Mean Square DP F Statistic P-Vslus Decialon(0.05) 

Between 104.329 104.329 1 1.15 0.31531 Non•ftrdfkantEffect 

Error 727.296 90.912 8 

Total 931.525015 195.241 9 

ANOVAAssumptions - 

Attribute Test Stat istic Critical P-Value Deelslon(O.Ot) 

Variances Variance Ra llo F 128388 23.15450 0.81452 Equal Variances 

Dist button Shapiro-Wilk W 0.84519 0.05090 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Dab Transformed Data 

Conc-% Control Type Cou nt Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artficlal SONS 5 75.780 81 • 84A 6.9226 

100 5 69.320 562 '77.9 10.110 

Graphic 

_ 1 

1 

1 1 

1 

1 

T 

< 1 i • 

11 • 

je 

1 

•1 

1 

• 1 

. 1 

1 

• j 

o ' 

0 100 •20 45 -a -6 OA O5 17 >i OA 

1on&% Manldts 

000-092-101.1 CETISM V1.12reN Analyst ^" Apploral: 

MINI Hi ll 

—44—


Report Date: 19 JnL DS Il I. 8 AM 

Analysis: 17.6768.6021IS154203paC 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic C4121111 Hi ll 


Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link ControlUnk DateAnalytad Version 

Average Length (mmrn) ComDaASaI 114025.3012 11.40254012 19 JuF0611:05 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NO0. LO0. Toxic Un its ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Unhanslormed




Analysis: 01.0398 -0 87418154203paC 

PlantBloassay- Chronic CH21 11 HIII 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Cont ro l Link DateAnsysed Version 

Average AG Wit (WK mg) Compa ri son 11-10253012 11.40253012 19Ju1• G&31AM CETISv1.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it s CW PMSO 

Equal Variance tTwo-SempleC> T Untransfonmad 100 >100 1 WA 35289E 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical PVal ue MSD DecklorKMO5) 

ArtMCWSOWSeA 100 121838 1.85955 0.1293. 10.4381 NonSignif icantEftact 

ANOVATable 

SourceSum of Squares' Mean Square DF F Statistic PValue Dechaon(0.05) 

Between 11&5494 118.5494 1 1A8 025551 Non-Significant.Ef ct 

Error 830.1755 7 11.77194 a 

Total 74&724945 195.32135 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Criti ca l P-Value D•clslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 1A9579 23.15450 0.70595 Equal Va riances 

Distribution Shapiro-Wik W 0.88182 0.08017 Normal Dis tribution 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Dal& 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Arti ficial So0IS 5 29.605 12.833 38528 9.717 

100 5 22.778 12.718 30.848 7.9451 

G ra ph ic s 

10, r 

4^ 

f 

1 r 

r 

• 

1 

x2 

G 1 

r 

• •^• 

S 1 r 

< 1 r 

• r r 

r 

< • i r 

r 

r 

0 

• • r r 

0 100 .10 .i,s .ys -af 0& 03 u 13 S& 

000 -092-101-1 CETISm v1.12revl Analyst a= Approval 

-46-




Analysis: 095216454318154203psC 

Plant Bioassay• Chronic - CH2M Hill 

Endpoint. AnaysIs Type Sample Link Control Link Data Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Congarfson 11.40253012 11.4025.3012 19 Ju"6 8:31 AM CET1Sv1.1.2 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOE L Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untransfolrrled 100 2-100 1 WA 35.38% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD DeeisforIM.06) 

Artificial SOfySedi 100 1.46361 1.85955 0.0907 1.78485 NonSWdllca It Effect 

ANOVATabfe 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DP FStatistic P-Value Decision(MOS) 

Between 4.769275 4369275 1 2.14 0.18145 Non,90v cant Effect 

Elror 17.81121 2226401 a 

Total 225809858 8.9958765 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decision(0.01) 

Variance& Variance RsfioF 1.80195 23.15450 0.58241 tqualVadanoes 

Distribution Shaplro•Wak W 0.85931 0.07488 Normal Distribution 


Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maxfmunt SO 

0 Artificial SoIVS 5 4.96040 2.05668 828333 1.138222 

100 5 3.57920 2.00800 4.85801 126063 

Graphics 

- 

t r 

I 

r 

• 

ao 

r • 

r 

r• 

gg 

B 

•r 

as 

as r 

r 

0A • i 

at 

r 

r 

I 

i 

oa 

o 

too 

a. 

•zo 

• 

-ts -to as 

r 

as as u is 

conMb 

aanHU . 

000.092-101-1 CETiS1e v1.12rev1 Analyst: S' Approval: 

u 

-47-

CUIS-Analysis Detail 

Plant Bioassay- Chronic 



Ansly513: 

07.6762531219154203psC 


Average Root WL (Wet mg) Compar ison 114025.3012 1140253012 16 Jul-06 8:31 AM CETISv1.12 

Method At H Data Transform Zen NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PM3D 

Equal Va ri ance tTxo-Sample C> T UntraWormed


Comparisons: Page? of 9 

Report Dale: 19 JuW6 8:32 AAA 

Analysis: 103047-536olB154203psC 

Plant Bbassay Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Ana ly sts Type Sample Unk Control Unk Date Anatyaed Version 

Aveta9a Root WL (Dry, mg) Comparison 1140253012 11 .40253012 19 JuWG 8:31 AM CEfISv1.12 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units dW PMSD 

Equal VadancetTwoSampk C>T UnUwalomwd 11100 >100 1 WA 39.40% 

G ro up Comparisons 

Control vs Conc-% Statist ic 

Cri ti cal P Value MSO DebWw(0.05) 

Ani0Ual 5olllSedl 100 0.74355 1.85955 02392 0.63723 Non-SWtoanl Effect 

ANOVATabit 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic PValue Dechaon(0.05) 

Between 0.1623032 0.162303 1 0.55 0.47842 NonSlpnificant Effect 

Error 2.348564 0293571 8, 

Total 2.51086763 0.4558735 9 - 


Attribute T es t Statistic Critical P Valus Deeisfon(0.01) 

Varfaricea Variance Rath F 1.32217 23.15450 0.79323 Equal VarWmu 

Distribution Shapiro•W9k W 0.96492 0.84022 Nomial Dtsblbutlon 


Cone-% Contr ol Type Court Mean Mlntmum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 AvtiSdal SNUS 5 1.51720 0.64667 2.06331 0.57819 

100 5 1.36240 0.81600 2.09200 0.50263 

Graph ics 

a-------- 

8 

---------------^--agat -^; 

al rz 

S 42 ' 

e a 

^C o r r 

0. i r 

al ^ 

00 I 

0 

100 •iO -Ls -to -0S 0.0 " to Ls 

Cone-'% 

000-092-101-1 CET N v1.12MA Analyst: !I— Approval• 

r 

' 

llanidb 

LO 

-49-


Comparisons: Pape 8 at 9 


Analysis: 17-M I-78M I54203psC 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH2M HI9 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Link Contr ol Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet mg) Comparison 11.10253012 11.4025-3012 19 Jul-068:31 AM CETISv1.12 


Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T ilntran sfonned 11100 >100. 1. WA 35.37% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Deahion(0.05) 

Ar tificial Soil SeOI 100 1.741 D4 1.85955 0.0599 235133 Non•Signi6a nt Effect 

ANOVA Tattle 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F StatisticP-Val ue Deeislon(0.05) 

Between 1211.628 1211.628 1 3.03 0.11986 NonSignlflaM Effect 

Error 3197.737 399.7171 a 

Total 4409.36499 1611.3455 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Cri ti cal P Value Deeision(0.01) 


Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.56762 0.09376 Normal Distribu tion 


Cone=f'• Cont rol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Mnimum SO 

0 Ar tificial SOWS 5 68A84 20.15 82.77 23.370 

100 5 44.469 24534 62.600 15.914 

Graphic 

1 20, 

1 

o --------------- Z-1-9 

-- 

1 r rr 

r 1 ^ I 

1 

1 

1 

i i 

I 

1 

• I 

I 

• 

I 

0 

0 Sao •20 •Ls •LO -03 0.11 0-e 1a >f 7 0 

Cerla•% aaalrits 

000 4D92.101.1 CETIS^ v/.12'evl Anayst `.^- Approval: 

-50-

Comparisons: Page 9ol 9 

&32 AM 

CETIS Analysis Detail nnalysis.ta- 09.3124-98718 203psC 

Plant Bloassay. Chronic 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Date Analyzed Vers ion 

Average Total Wt (Dry. mg) Compa ri 

son 11.4025.3012 11 .40253012 19 Jul-W 8:31 AM CETI30 .1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform 2aft I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Va ri ance It TYwSample C> T tln translomisd 1100 >100 1 WA 35.95% 


Control vs Cone-Y. Statistic Critical P.Vakm MSD Dscls)on(0.05) 

Ar tificial SoWSedl 100 1.28838 1.85955 0.1171 2.36495 Nan-S)pNBrant Effed 

ANOVATablo 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa re OF F StatisticP-Value Dacision(0.05) 

Between 6.691254 8.691254 1 1.65 023429 NonSigNficantEBect 

Error 

32.34898 4.043621 8 

Total 39.0402188 1 0.734873 9 


Attribute Test Stausdc Critical P-Wlue Dedaton(0.01 

Variances Variance Ratio F 1.69432 23.15450 0.62201 Equal Varianoes 

Distribution Shaplro-Wilk W 0.68744 0.15864 Normal Distribu tion 

Data Summary Original Data Transformod Daft 

Cone.% Control Type Count Moan Minimum Maxbnurn SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar tificial SOWS 5 6.57761 2.70335 8.32688 225514 


Graphic 

^ 

Q& 

^. oa r r 

41.7 

03 

a • i 

r 

r 

r 

r • 

r 

0.t i 

to 

o 100 

As 

70 -tJ -ye os 

r 

sa 0.e • 1.0 >s 2A 

r 

•re 

r 

C•ne. % naaidta 

000-M-101-1 CETISm v1.12MA Analyst:_Approval: 

r 

r 

CH2M Hill 

-51-

OaK wblYpnClawMW RaM4 

BLUEGRABBOROWrHTEBT 

T^1 MID/s o^y p 

.'r 

Dr,O^ o•ra_t " DwW.^^ D9 10^_ W/10 oz'—N= D•/n e^ aQk ^^ 

y.,^^ 

.at/./Yy 

B VOID: PA Sy2 . 07 w 

IOwnft sn+uW W 

Ctl1G RERIO,Ia 

m"k01.nr.rr•at 1' rAt•balbrSM 

R"l D 

Awbc 

R•rbw o 

nbrre 

ArrYYY^Nb amllWrrl D^•aeb.bi.abwa 

bpsbA 

lbrlab s 

RrparD 

RW♦ *O 

F - 9 

A>.r. ♦rotllwpt 

MlMI•r AOba M•M.O•M'a 

Irea.•ba^d) 

b•bb 3E wryb 

Trf+rb Wa"- Fpr 

o^,b.babr.r.as 

RpOU •A 

RTbrbr 

RWarD 

RrpsD 

Wpulb[ 

YrbbaRmllbaOb 

40.WÎraRMMbgMreO1 

M d 1•Yp 

br^raRmlwrl♦^b 

ttilbr 

I^ rb•0 Mr+a 

4.ti 4 • i^l 

1•^ 1$4" 

Olnl'0 Obâ71 I 

Mr+O7 /naa 

A (0 0 

Mos rar. 

^^^RD^ 

ILi2••b+^b 

Mr+al 

^ 

y 

o 

Iql q 1 S 

+s 

A 

ob.b.Rbabvra.bb 

4 3 -J-A-i - 

rb.nPl•lisrâs+.rl. 

TOY1 bbO tl M boY lab / •OrObP ^_ Efffi • ♦ : 

MU rEM I^_ ^ 

WA UJMH ^ WllroUm 

L9^^)^ )^ 

Owwry 

ô_




Test Link,07.83695277/B154208psC 

Plant Bloassay-Chronlo - CH2M HII 

Test No: 1314444664 Test Type. Plant Chronic Duration: WA 

Start Date: 05 Apr-05 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Species: Poe sandberpl 

Ending Date: DO Water. Source: 

Setup Date: OSApr-OS Brine: - 

Comments: recalculated Height and Length data July 19, 2005. 

Sample No: 155450.5055 Code: 81542-08 Client* 

Sample Date: 28 Nov-05 Materlah Soll ProjecC 

Receive Date: Source. Hanford 


Comments: 41OW5, 1389701 

Comparlson Su mwy 


08-93396639 %Germinafan 100 :.100 WA 22.99% Equal Variance t Tw"ample 

05-9747-9588 Average Height (mm)


%Germination3ummary 


0 Artificial SOWS 5 0.81000 0.60000 1.00000 0.09798 021909 26.08% 

100 5 0.96000 0.80000 11== 0.04000 0.089{4 9.32% 


Cone-Ye Co ntro l Type Reps Mean MkJmurrl Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 75.780 61 84AOO 3.9903 8.9226 11.77% 

100 5 51.48 39.6 64 3.9825 8.9057 1730% 

Average Length (mm) Summary r 


0 Ani6dal SONS 5 9122 50 117.40 11A 25.491 27.94% 

1DO 5 53.600 39200 62.400 42459 9.4942 17.71% 


Conc-% 

Control 

rype Raps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 


Arliklal SOWS 5 

5 

29.605 

16.921 

12.833. 

13.174 

3025 

25232 

4.3456 

22337 

&717 

4.9047 

32.82% 

29.52% 

Average AG Wt (DrA mg) Summary 

Conn% Control Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE So CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 4.96040 2.05668 826333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 2.91350 2.31799 3.92000 028112 0.62850 2158% 


Conn% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum. SE SD CV 

0 ArbWal SOWS 3 36.878 13317 46.99 &1616 13.778 3726% 

100 5 22.994 12.764 37.868 4.1506 9.281 40.36% 

Average Root W L (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone=/6Co nt rol Type Reps MoD( Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial $ONS 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 025857 0.57819 35.75% 

100 5 1.46240 1.04600 2.04600 0.16241 0.36317 24.83% 


ConaY. ContrdType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 ArWdal SoOIS 5 66.454 2&150 112.77 t0A52 23.370 35.15% 

1DO 5 39.915 25.938 83.1 &3258 14.145 35A4% 



0 AMWW SoWS 5 6.57761 2.70335 a32686 1.00853 225514 3429% 

100 5 4.37590 3.36399 5.96599 0.44024 0.98441 2250% 

Report Date: 

Paps 2 of 3 

19 Jui-06 9:11 AM 

Test Link 074369.52771B154208psC 

DOD-092-101-1 CETISm V1.12nA Analyst: .A"' Approval: 

-54-




0 Artifidal SOWS 0.60000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 1.00000 

100 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.80000 


Cone.% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rap 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 61 84A000 75.8000 80.7 77 

100 50 39.6 64 49 54.8 


Cone-Y. Control Typs Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 50 117AOO 99.8000 88.7 1022 

100 51A000 392000 614000 53 62 

Average AG Wt (We4 mg) Detail 

COW/*Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 


100 14.0380 13.174 252320. 14.218 17.945 - 

Average AG WI (Dry, mg) D" 

ConO-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArOBdal SOWS 2.05668 6.05200 526000 626333 5.17000 

100 2.58401 2.31799 3.92000 2.64800 3.09750 

Average RootWL (Wet, mg) Detail 

Cono-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 . Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial So9IS 13.3167 452540 35.3420 48.99 42A88 

100 21.4260 12.7640 37.888 19.062 23.8525 

Average Root WL (Dry, mg) Detail . 


0 Artificial SOOTS 0.64667 1.92800 1.52800 2.06331 1.92001 

100 1.37800 1.04600 2.04600 1.36199 1.45999 

Average Total Wt (Wat, mg) Detail 

Cone-% Cont rol Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 ArUkIW SOWS 28.1500 82.0800 68.0900 11277 73.328 

100 35.4640 25.938 63.1 33278 41.7975 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Dotal( 

Conr,% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 


100 3.96201 3.36399 5.96599 4.03000 4.55751 



Teat Link,07.8369-5277IB154208peC 

000-092-101-1 CETISm v1.12 A Analyst '#S'- Approval: 

-55-


Compa risons: Page 1 of 9 


Analysis: 118.9339-663918154208psC 

Plant8-1 say-Chrotdc CH2MHUI 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample LMk Cont"A Link Date MMyled Vers ion 

% Gemninatbn Cornper(wn 07-03895277 07.83695277 19 JUW6 8:38 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Aft H DataTranstonn We 11 NOEL LOEL ToxicUnks ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Samp4eC>T Angular (Corrected) 11100 >100 1 WA 2299% 


Control vs Cone-Y. Statistic Critical P•Value MSO Declan(0.05) b 

Artificial SoilfSedl 100 -1.1138 1.85955 0.8512 022714 Nm,-Agnffiwnt Effect 

ANOVATabte 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P.Valus Decislon(0.05) 

Between 0.0462777 0.046278 1 124 029769 NonSignificanl Effect 

Error 02984103 0.037301 8 

Total 0.344688 0.0835790 9 


Attribute Test Sb6stie Critical P-Val" Deeislon(0.01) 

Varianeas Varlarm Re go F 5.57779 23.15650 0.12462 Equal Variances 

DlsM*on Shapiro-Wilk W 0.82019 0.02548 Nmnel D%bftUon 

Data summary Original Data Transformed Data 


0 mfidal Sows 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.001100 021909 1.16160 0.88808 1.34528 025152 

100 5 0.98000 0.60000 ,1.00000 0.08944 129766 1.10715 1.34528 0.10650 

Graphics 

65 

} i • • 

I 

1 

om • •1• • 

_____________ __ __yL 1 

0. -0.1 r 1 

0.1 1 

Oe 


ojo 

-LO 4 1 

• 

-la -0.e 

1 

1 

OA U LO 13 7.e 

cor,* , Mnldtx 

WO-W2-101 -1CETIS" v1.12MA 

-a 

1 

^ 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Analyst _b= Approval: 

-56-




Mslysls: - 05-9747-9566B7542OW 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unit Date Analysed Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 07-8369-5277 07.83895277 19Jul-068:36AM CETISv1.12 

Method Aft N Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Took Units CIN PMSD 

Equal Variance t TaoSamplo C>T Untansbrmec 11,100 100 WA - 1323% 


Control vs Conc.% Statistic Critical P-Value MW Dedsion(&OS) 

Artificial SoWSedi 100 4.31019 1.85955 0.0013 10.4838 S4Mcant Effect 

MOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Stattstc P-Value Dadsion(O.05) 

Between 147&225 1478.225 1 18.58 OA0258 Significant Effect 

Error 635.696 79.46201 8 

Total 2111.92114 1555.8871 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Vatu• Deciston(0.01 


DistrUllon Shapiro-Wik W 0.95429 0.71928 Normal DisMition 


Cone-% Control Type Count Moan Minimum Maximum SD Mesn Minimum Maxlnrtsn SD 

0 Arti6dal SOUS 5 75.780 61 84A 8.9228 

100 5 51AS 39.8 64 &9057 

Graphics 

t r 

1 

s ' r 

1 r 

t i r 

1 0 ______________ 

0 

• r r 

0 100 •2-0 •La •1D de OA 05- !d IS ?A 

Core. % Itanldts 

000-092-101-1 CEnSn' vt.l2revl Analyst 27- Approval: 

1 

i 

-57-

GETIS Analysis Detail 


Report Data: 19 JuW6 9:11 AM 

Analysis: 14-167333W5154208psC 

Plant Blosasay, • Chronic CHU Hill 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Length (mm) Companson 074369.5277 07.8389.5277 19 Jrtl-06 9:10 AM CETISv1.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL . Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untransformed




Analysis: %1079.1146I8154208p3C 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Rig 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Un it Control Un it 

Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt . (Wet mg) Comparison 07.8369-5277 07.8369.5277 19 JuWS 8:36 AM CEIIISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Unbansfomled


Plant Bloassay-Chronic 

Comparlsons: Page S of 9 

Report Date: 19 JuW6 8:36 AAA 

Analysis: 15.7308.83139154208psC 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Llnk Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 0748389.5277 07.83!19.5277 19 Jul-W 8:38 AM CETISv1.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two Sample C>T Unhanstormed ,100 100 WA 3026% 


Control vs Con" Statistic Critical PValus MSD Deelslon(0.05) 

lvE8cia1 SdVSedi 100 2.53545 1.85955 0.0175 1.50124 Significant EBecl 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statta6c P Value Decislon(0.05) 

Between ' 10.47451 10.47451 1 SA3 0.03496 Significant Effect 

Error 13.03506 1.829382 8 

Total 23-095625 12103888 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Value Decislon(0.01 

Variances Variance Rata F 724704 23.15450 0.08109 Equal Variances 

DI5bbulion ShaplroWBkW 0.84825 0.05537 Normal 1310 bon 


Cone-Y. Control Typo Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SoiVS. 5 4.96040 2.05866 626333 1.89222 

100 5 2.91350 2.31799 342000 0.62660 

Graphics 

Lo 

i • 

al n • 

ak 

ar 

as 

0.4 

s i n 

0.2 

0.1 u i 1 

0.a 

0 

Conic 

ae 

100 44 •LS •LO -0.5 0.0 4 LO La 

sa nits 

000-092-101-1 CETISn'v1.12MA Anatyst-- Approvah. 

i 

•' 

r 

n 

i 

CHUM Hill 

1.0 

-60-



Report Data: 19 Jul-0S 8:3S AM 

Analysis: 14-50M9409154208psC 

Plant 810"say • Chronic CH2M Hi0 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root WL (Wet mg) CDMPWWn 07-0369-52T7 07.8309-5277 19 Jul-W &36 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Tmnsform Lta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t TwoSampia C>T Untrarmbmbd 114100 100 .WA 37.46% 


Control vs Cono-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Dedsion(0. 

Artificial SdUSedi 100 1.86880 1.85966 0.0493 13.8149 _ Significant Elfed 

ANOVATabls 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Sta ti stic P Val" Dsdslon(0.05) 

Between 485888 481.8868 1 3A9 0.09859 NWI-Significant EBed 

Error 1103.85 137.9813 8 

Total 158&73911 619.87006 9 


AHr9xde Test Statistic Critical P Val" Deelalon(0.01) 

Variances Varlence Raft F 2.20379 23.15450 0.46291 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapko-VM W 0.94621 0.62394 Normal Mtrlbution 


Cone-U. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maxhrwm SO 

0 Arbfidal SogAS 5 38178 13.317 46.99 13.778 

100 5 22.994 12.764 37AN 9281 

Graphics 

1 , • 

f , 

8 t r 

t r 

t • t r 

0 

0 no 

ConCM 

•i0 .ts -a 4s a0'U" as 

000-092-101-1 CET1Sm V1.1.2rev1 Analyst: :!Y—• Approval: 

ri i 

r ii 

Pnieb 

IS 

-61-



Report Datr- 19 Ju1 -06 836 AM 

Analysts: 01 A6653750IB 154208psC 

Plant Bioassay. Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sampta Link Control Uric Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Comparison 07-0368,5277 07.83695277 19 Jul-08 8:38 AM CETISv1.12 

Method AN H Date Transform 7.eta NOEL LOEL T ox ic Un it 

s CW PMSD 

Equal VadancelTho•SampfeC>T Untransfammed 100 >100 1 WA 35.11% 

Group Compartsons 

Control vs Cone•% Statis ti c Critical P Value M30 Decisbn(0.08) 

Artificial SodlSed 100 0.50697 1.85955 0.3129 0.58781 Non-Signi ficant Effect 

ANOVAT" 

Source Sum of Squaroa Man Square OF F Stat isti c P Value Deelsion(0.05) 

Between 0.0599087 0.05991 1 028 0.62585 NonSV Acant Effect 

Er ror 1.864768 0233096 8 

Total 1.92467780 02930057 9 


Attribute Test Statistic . Critical P Value Dectsion(0.01) 

Va riances Variance Ratio F 2.53463 23.15450 0.38967 Equal Var iances 

Dlsbibudon Shapiro-Wilk W - 0.82278 0.38072 Normal Distribullon 

Data SummaryOriginal Data Transformed Data 

Cone-14 ' Contr ol Type Count Man Minimum Maximum SO Man Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar tificial SOIUS 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 0.57819 

100 5 1.46240 1.04600 2.04600 0.38317 

Graphic 

'------- ---------------L-- 

• 

' 

0 r 

• 

r 

0. 

r 

{ OJ r • 

V 

0.t 

a? 

• 0.p ------- ------ ----------- 

• • t r 

Qs 

0. • 

i 

L 

r 

r 

a r 

00 

0 100 •tA •le •1A 43 OA 0.0 lA !3 Zd 

Cane% awake 

000-092.101-1 CETIS" vl.I.ZvA`b'" 

Aê1Ye^— Approval' 

r 

r 

-- 

—62—



Report Date: 19 Jrd-06 &38 AM 

Analysla: 08.4711.93138154208psC 

Plant Dloassay-Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Compadson 07.83695277 07-03695277 19 Jul-06 &38 AM CETISv1.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Variance 1 Two-Sample C)- T Untransfomied X100 100 WA 34.17% 


Control vs Cono-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSD Decislon(0.05) 

Artllkial Soi/Sedl 100 2.17471 1 A%W 0.0307 22.7178 Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DIP F Statisdo P-Value Decislon(0.116) 

Between 1764.08 1764.66 1 4.73 0.06137 NonSIpN6rant Flfect 

Error 2985.025 373.1281 8 

Total 4749.66494 2137.7579 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P•Value Decislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Rath F 2.72988 23.15450 0.35420 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiro-WilkW 0.92551 0.40519 Normal Distribution 


Conc.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean' Minimum Maxknum 8D 

0 Artikial SOWS 5 68.454 2&15 82.77 23.370 

100 8 39.915 25938 63.1 14.145 

Graphics 

g 1 

1 

t 

t . r r 

1 


Comparisons: Pags9of 9 


Analysis: 09.1572.45441B154208psC 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic• CH2M 1611 

Endpoint Analysis Type SamplsUnk ControlUnk DateAnaly[ed Ve rsion 

Average Total Wt (Dry. mg) Comparison 07.83695277 07.6389.5277 19 JuIM &38 AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method - Alt H Data Transform Zets NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance tWoSample C> T . Un trando med

o.ne..rrw.^ 

ftOu A 

Aye a 

RyvrC _ 

R601r,D 

A•,bY n 

Y•„.•MtrOY 

W^0.11.OwaM bOr c,l 

M•,tA•wAO 

BlDaeaAU OnowrH TeaT 

Cwt W--,&O.. D.w.w+s!(► 

Trbwoas 4 

o•rO 

,A.M s `1T 

o7rT^. DNf^—"-.X— Dyl•a^_ D,/I• N,t' Dwn oM»^ Dn?' Ds. 

war.at Hx ^ IIS 

Ems p 

COMC RlRL m It#" f1•M It". M• s 

ar rr ••,r ar 

a.+o a60w r`+w r.ti 

Cana 

a,..awm+Dra uH , 

me" "ft$ 

ar ar 

r60w ,•,.o 

TaAnroar. ,taa^nwaT. 

r[ ~••~ 

r.*or 

A +aS 

r a.+w 

. Z 3 3 

D 6 fo ^s c 

s S 

TO•„I.wiw,iw•,60 s„a,wN M•sw• rssr4sw rswrs0y 

I4,b,OA S !^ Cs 

,^.^.,,. 2Lyl^r 1 s.•,. C^ 

A.,A60oe v 

A.r.r.D Cs 1 Sw (r 

A,,,url • 1 

I•,.n Cs Dw ll'- O P O6060r...hwq •er p.^rr.r.A 

hynYA 

A60Aar a 

P^„C 

SOD 

a,,.vna 

M w PHwc 

•MUuah.wd W 60,0O 

W •D••60) 

M• SWwwo 

TW.uraao.." 

law•w,b 

Nr Vftolk 

Tw n clam"A"m 60,00 

•ffUL 

aa60w 

rwa 

(a H.q•hM• 

y,p„^ 

y. • a w• ,wr Dr,n 60 a.,rf . • rr • • a,rr twr w rx A..w r60as • s.. •..r ar. {rf rmy 

_lll^ mourfilMNow-S-3mmmllrAl" 

_ Wîr-7mr-Im 

MOTT1111"1739ME 

ê.s.r i




Test Unk: 1 &9232.97078158001psA 

Plant Bloassay - Chrome CH2M Hill 

Test No: 0948165990 Test Type: Plant CtroNO Duration: WA 

Start Date: 05 Apr-06 Protocol: ASTM EINU2 (2002) Species: Poa sandtergil 

Ending Date: Dil Water: Source: 

Setup Date: 05 Apr-00 Brine: 

Comments: recalculated Height and length date July 19, 2000 

Sample No: 07-0112.4502 Code: 111568-01 Client: 

Sample Date: 22 Mar-08 Material: Sol Project 

Receive Dab: Souris: Hanford 

Sample Age: 14d Oh 3ta0on: 

Comments: J11JU 



18.10514751 % Germination 100 > 100 WA 27.93% Wlcoxort Rank Sum Two-Sample 

09.1221-020 Average Height (mm) 100 WA 28.98% Equal Variance tTwo•Sample 

09-6082-0345 Average Root WL (Wet, mg 100 >100 WA 40.92% Equal Variance tTo-Sanpla 

1045905559 Average Root WL_(Dry, mg) 100 >100 WA 35.48% Equal Variance 11 Two-Sample 

0 23 98 0-74 07 

12-111&5190 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg 

Avenge Total Wt (Dry, mg) 



> 100 

> 100 

WA 

WA 

30.99% 

29.78% 

Equal Variance It Two-Sample 

Equal Va ri ance lTwSample 

000-09&101-1 CETIS° V1.12rev1 Analyst U'_" Approval: 

-66-




0 Artificial SoiVS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 0.0979a 021909 28.011% 

100 5 0.92000 0.60000 1.00000 0.08000 0.17869 19A4% 

Average t4efghl (mm) Summary 


0 Artfidal SONS 5 75.780 61 84.400 3.9903 &9228 11.77% 

100 5 56.780 48 63AOO 2.5303 5.8579 9.98% 

Average Length (mm) Suwriary 

Cone',. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Mcdmun SE SD CV 

0 Artr5bal SoelS 5 91.22 50 117.10 11A 25A91 27.94% 

100 5 54.94 48200 682 2.9441 &5832 11.98% 

Avenge AG Wt (Wet, mg) Summary . 

Cone-•.. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Aftf lal SOWS 5 29.605 12.833 36.828 4.3456 9.717 3282% 

100 5 27.831 20.878 4021 3.3027 7.385 26.54% 

Average AG Wt (Dry, m9) Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Raps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 4.96040 205608 626333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 3.67426 3.27800 4.15801 0.15767 0.35255 9.601. 


Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Ma)dmu r SE SD CV 


100 5 33.714 15.53 47.044 52816 11110 35.03% 


Con" Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD Cv 

0 ArtfcialSOiVS 5 1.61720 0.84667 206331 025857 017819 35.75% 

100 5 115145 113000 227400 0.16841 0.37657 20.34% 



0 Arti6dalSoWS 5 66.484 2&150 82.77 t0A52 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 61.545 51.644 71A5 3.6797 82281 13.37% 


Cone-% Cont ro l Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artlllcial SONS 5 6.57761 270335 8.32668 1.00&53 2.25514 3429% 

100 5 5.52573 4.81399 6.40199 0.30399 0.67973 1230% 


Report Date: 19 MM ",II AM 

Testt.ink,. 10.9232.97071B756601psA 

000-092101-1 CETISw vl.12rev1 Analyst; Zr Approvak 

-67-



COW/6 Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 

0 Artificial SoIVS 0.60000' 1.00000 1.00000 0.80000 1.00000 

100 140000 0.60000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 


Conc-Y. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SoIIIS 61 54A000 758000 80.7 77 

100 59 55.7D00 63.4000 48 57.8 




100 4&2000 503 652 56 55 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mill Detail 

Cone-'A Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SoIVS 128333 36.8260 31.748 3576 30.84 

100 24.408 4021 2564 20.8780 28.0200 


Cone-% Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOUS 245668 6.05200 526000 626333 517000 

100 3.79600 3.38332 4.15801 327800 3.75599 


Conc-Y. Control Type Rap t Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 A Mdat SOWS 13.3167 452540 36.3420 46.99 42.488 

100 47.044 15.53 3533 30.788 39.9000 

Average ROO WL (Dry, mg) Detail 



1DO 2.27400 1.673.34 224399 1.53599 1.53000 


Core-X Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOIUS 2&1500 624800 6&O9oo 8277 73.328 

100 71A5 55.74 60.97 51.544 67.92 

Average Total WI (Dry, mg) Detail 

ConcOA Contr ol Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOUS 2.70335 7.98000 6.787701 8.32860 7.09000 

100 &06999 505664 6AO199 4.81399 528801 


Report Date. 19 JU-06 9:14 AM 

Test Link: 159232-9707l8IWW1psA 

000.092.101.1 CETISw V1.12MA Analyst_Approval: 

-68-

CUTS Analysis Detail 


Report Data: 19 Jrl-08 8:40 AM 

Anatysl s: 18.10.51.4781/8158601 psA 

Plant Bloassay-Chronic CH2M HID 

Endpoint Analysis Type SampleLir* Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

%Germination Comparison 18.9232.9707 184232-9707 19 Jul-06 8:39 AM CETIW.12 

Method AD H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

W ilcoxon Rank Sum Tw o-SampleC> T Ranh 100 >100 1- WA 27.93% 


vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P-Vakrs Ties Declak"X0.05) 

Artificial Cc trot SoWSedl 100 30 0.6548 3 NonSigni and Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F St"le P-Value Dsoislon(0.05) 

Between 0.021087 0.021087 1 0.40 0.54474 Noo-Sfpraficanl E}fed 

Error 0.4217399 0.052717 8 

Total 0.44282693 0.0738045 9 


AtVlbuts Test 3 tattatio Critical P-Vakre Declslon(0.01) 


Diet bu800 ShapW-WBk W 0.75864 0.00455 Non-norm al Dla trib uuon 


Cono•Ya Control Type Count Mean' Mlnlmum MaAmum SO Mean Minimum Maximum 30 . 

0 ArtificialSoIIIS 5 0.84000 0.6WW 140000 021909 5.00000 2.00000 7.00000 2.73861 

100 5 0.92000 0.60000 140000 0.17869 8.00000 200000 7.000110 223607 

Graphics 

at r 

Oa 

r • • 

os 

s 

r 

______________r_-__________._ 

a4rs W ^ r 

f i 

i 

U r 

at i 

r 

0.e 

rm •:o •ts eta as as as u 1:5 

a 

on.o-la 

000.092-101.1 CETIS° v1.1.2mvi Analyst; Approval: 

ttadrkf 

u 

-69-


Comparlsons: Page 2 of 9 

Report Date: 19 JuW6 &40 AM 

Analysis: 041223.8020/8158801 psA 

Plant Bioassay-ChroNC C112M NI8 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Co ntrol Link Dab Analyzed Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 169232-9707 18-9232.9707 19 JuW6 8:39 AM CET1SA.1.2 

Method Alt N Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance, tTwo-Sample C>T Un transbrmad


Comparlsons: Page 1 of 1 

Report Dats: 19 Jul-W 9:14 AM 

Analysis: 03-464W61B156601 psA 

Plant Bloassay. Chronic CH2111 HIII 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Length (mm) Comparison 164)232-9707 16.9232-9707 19 JuM 9:13 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt N Data Transform Zoe NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance l Two-Sample C>T Untransformed c100 100 WA 24.00% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P-Valus MSD Dedslon(O.05) 

Artificial SOWSec9 100 3.08142 1.85955 04075 21.6939 Significant Effect 

/NOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mon Square DIP F Statistic P Value Doeision(0.05) 


Error 2772.44 346.565 8 

Total 0063.03589 3637.1508 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Yalu• D•eNlon(0.01) 


Disaibution Shapko-Wgk W 0.87809 0.12406 Normal Distribution 

Data Summary Original Daft Trandormed Data 

Cone-yeControl Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mon Minimum Maximum SO 

0 ArificialSoiVS 5 9122 50 117.4 25.491 

100 5 54.94 482 652 6—KIW 

Graphic 

LW r rrrrr • 

r r 

__________________ 

t {. 

0 

.t 

• r r 

0 100 -10 43 •lt 44 as df W )s ld 

carc-% tank t 

OW-M.101-1 CETIS"r v1.1.2WA Analyst•L 4"' Apprwal: 

t r 

ir 

r 

-71'

CEfIS Analysis. Detail 

Comparisons: • Page4of 9 

Report Data: 19 JW-06 8:40 AM 

Analysis: 03.M I .10.5218158601 psA 

Plant Sioassay- Chronic CH2M Hi ll 

Endpoint Analysis Typo Sample Link Control Link Da ta Analyzed Version 

AveragsAGWt (Wet, rtw) Comparison 169232-9707 16-9232-9707 19JuW-08&39AM CETISvi.0 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic UnRa ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance l TvzsSsng leC > T Unkaroformed 11100 2100 1 WA 3428% 


Control vs Cone-Y, Statist ic 

Critical P-Value MSD Dxlaton(o.05) 

ArtificialSoWSadl 100 0.32514 1.85955 0.3767' 1 0.1497 NonSprificant. EBect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Moan SquareOF F Sta tis tic P•Valus Deetabn(0.05) 

Between 7.873582 7.8735 82 1 0.11 0.75342 Non-Significant Effect 

Error 595.8298 74.47873 8 

Total 603.703416 82.352311 9 

ANOVAAssumplkms 

Attribute Test Statistic critical P Valve Dectsion(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F - 1.73128 23.15450 0.60795 Equal Variances 

DIMtrIMr6on Shaptro-WHk W 0.98823 0.87396 Normal Dis tribution 

Da ta Summe ry 

Original Data - Transformed Data 

Cores% Control Type Count Moan 

Minimum 

Maximum SO Mean M inimum Maxtmon SO 

0 Ar tificial SOWS 5 29.605 12.833 38.528 9.717 

100 5 27.831 20.578 4021 7.355 

G raphics 

1 ^ 

t i 

r 

1 ^ • 

1 1 1 

0 

• loo - .1.0 •u .ro as ao os w u w 

Coeo •1a aanklta 

—7Z- 

000-092-101-1 CEfiS"'vi.l.Z*A Analyst Approva4__ 

r 

r 

r r 

r 

1

CETIS Anarysis Detail 


Report Date: 19 JuF06 &40 AM 

Analysis: 02-2663-7617/3156601psA 

Plant Blcassay Chronic C112M 1611 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 16.9232-9707 16.9232-9707 19 Jul-06 6:39 AM CETISVi.12 

Method Alt H Dap Transform Zeta=EL Toxic Units ChV eamPMSD 

Equal Variance lTwoSample C> T Untransfomwd 11100 X100 1 . WA 26.98% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Daclslon(0.05) 

Aridwai So0tsedi 100 1.68375 1.65955 OM74 1.4373 Non-Sgnlllcimt Ef ed 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value Decielon(0.03) 

Between 4.135365 4.135365 1 2.77 0.13473 NonSignill®M FSpot 

Error 11.95166 1.493957 a 

Total 15.0870241 54293229 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decislen(0.01 

Variances Variance Ratio F 23.03905 23.15450 0.01009 Equal Variances 

DlsbOwOOn Shapirowk W 0.60366 0.01808 Normal DaIrUtIon 

Dap Summary Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone-% 'Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 42MO 2.05M 826333 1.69222 


Graphics 

u 

r 

• 

0.91 

s 

L& 

43 

Lo 

as, 

------:-----L 

e 

r 

' r 

r 

• 

------------a+ 

r 

s ; 

r 

m 'r 0.1 -is i 

U 


-3.0 

a.a 

• 

as -1.0 45 

' 

OA es to Ls 2.0 

Ccr4-% aanNp 

—73- 

000-092-101-1 CETIS TM W.1.2revl Analyst 9 Approval_


Comparisons: Pape of 9 

Report Date: 19 JuF08 &40 AM 

Analysis: 09-8082.0345r8156801psA 

Plant Sloan" -Chronle . CH21ANil 


Average Root W L (WK mg) Comparison 16-9232.9707 18.8232-9707 19 JuWX &39 AM CEnSv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zat NNOEL LOEL Tattle Units CIIV PMSD 

Equal Variance t TwoSampie C>T Unbansfwmed 100 >100 1 WA 40.92% 

Glroup Comparisons 

Control ve Cono-X stadadc Critical P Value MSD Dedslon(D.05) 

ArlificlaiSoWSedi 100 0.38989 1.85955 0.3534 15.0911 NortSigNBtanlEffect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Ststist c P-Value Daelsion(0.05) 

Between 25.0245 25.0295 1 0.15 030679 NomSlgnifirant Effect 

Error 1317.221 184.6527 S 

TOW 134225081 109.88218 9 

ANOVAAssumpdons 

Attribute Test StaOsUa Critical P-Val" Dectsion(0.01) 

Variances Variarm Ratio F 1.36097 23.15450 0.77245 Equal Variances 

Dist "bon Staplrr-Wilk W 0.87175 0.10478 Normal Disblbudon 


Conc-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minknurri Maximum SO Meam Minimum Maximum SD 


100 5 33.714 15.53 47.044 11.810 

Graphics 

' 

i 

1 

i 

. 

1 

1 

1 

• 

• 

11• 1 

•1 

• 

i1 • 1 1 

1 

.1 

1 

1 

0 

• 

• 1 11 

1 

1 ' 

0 ' 100 ,ta -La •lA -0.S 0.0 0.S !d I.t i.0 

Cm % aal kas 

000.092-1014 CET1S°1 v1.1.2revl Analyst: Approval: 

1 

-74-


Comparisons: Pa"Tof 9 

Report Data: 19 Jti-08 d40 AM 

Analysis: 10A590.5559V8156801 psA 

Plan( Sloassay - Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Llnk Control Link Date Aneynd Version 

Average Root WL (Dry,'np) cwvaftm 18.9232.9707 1641232-0707 19 M-06 8.39 AM cETISv1.12 

Method AS H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Untis ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance lTwoSample C> T tMbanslonned 100 >100 1 WA 35.48% 


Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSO DecWon(0.05) 

Artificial solnedi 100 -0.7592 1.85955 0.7852 0.57382 NanSlgnlBcent Effect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P.Vslue Deelslon(0.05) 

Between 0.1372013 0.137201 1• Oze 0.46952 Nm•SlOnifinnt Effect 

Error 1.906404 0.238051 8 

Total 2.04180514 0.3752518 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Val" Decision(0.01) 

Vadances Variance Ratio F 2.35752 23.15450 0.42657 Equal Vadnces 

Distribution Shapao•Wilk W 0.86708 0.09240 Normal Distribution 



0 ArbkW SOLE 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 0.57819 

100 5 1.85146 1.53000 227400 0.37657 

Graphics --------"""'- 

Le 

--""-"7rpaiAr' 

r• • 

r 

8 r 0.o --------- 

r 

a ,a • i 

car 

ao 

o 

roe a.o •u •u as 

ri 

r 

r 

as as u u 

care % 

sanklis 

000-092-101-1 CETISW V1.12reM Analyst; 

r 

_ 

u 

-75-


Compa ri sons: Page GOt 9 

Report Date: 19 Jul-08 &40 AM 

Analysis: 02:5966740716156601 psA 

PkM Bioassay-Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Typo Sample Link Control Link Dab Arudynd Ve rsion 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) CanpaMOn 169232-9707 169232.9707 19 JuFW &39 AM CET)SV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL' LOEL Toxic UnitsChV PMSO 

Equal Variance l Two-Sample C>T Unbansiomsd 100 >100 1 NIA 30.99% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Dectid".0 

Ar06cial SONSedl 100 0.44572 1.85955 0.3338 20.6046 , Non-SWificant EMU 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic 10-Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 60.97949 60.97949 1 020 0.66761 Non.SlgnlOwnt EMU 

Env 2455.527 306.9409 a 

Total 2516.50663 367.92041 9 

ANOVA Assumption 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decision(0.01) 

Va riances Variance Ratio F 8.06740 23.15450 0.06761 Equal Varianoes 

Dist ribuson Shap4oWIR W 0.83722 0.04087 Normal DistritnMon 

Data Summary Orig inal Data Transformed Data 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minknum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Adfficlal Soil/S 5 68.484 2&15 82.77 23.370 

100 S 61.545 51.644 71.43 82281 

Graphics . 

6 

tl 7 

1 ^ • 

1 r 

^ • 

r 

• r 

^ 71 r 

rrr 

0 

0 700 

,tA -13 44 {a 

r 

as Os • is 1s 

Con?% 

R•ahne 

000-092-1014CET1Sw v1.1.2re wlAnalyst: Apprwai: 

• 

i 

r 

r 

r 

r 

td 

-76-


Plant Bioassay, •Ch ronic 

Comparisons: page 9of 9 

Report Date: 19 Ju1-06 &40 AM 

Analysis: 12-1116.51M156MIpSA 

Endpoint . Analysis Type Sampla Link Control Lurk Data Anslyred Version 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Comparbon 18-9232.8707 18&232.9707 19 JuW6 6:39 AM CET 1Sv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zala INOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C> T Untrarrotamed 100 >100 1 .. WA 29.78% 


Contr olvs Conn% Statistic Critical P-Value IaSO Deelsion(0.05) 

Artificial SOWSed 100 0.99861 1.85955 0.1738 1.95875 NonSigniBnnt Effect 

ANOVATabfe 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statis tic P-Value Deeislon(0.0M 

Between 2.766133 2755133 1 1.00 0.34723 Non-Significant Efied 

Error 2219074 2.773843 6 

Total 244568751 5.5399754 9 


Attribute Test Statistic . Critical P-Vafue Decislon(0.01) 

Vadances Variance Rat io F 11.00708 23.15450 0.03931 Equal Va ri 

ances - 

Distifbu0on Shapko-Volk W 0.84038 0.04459 Normal Dis tr(DWon 


Cone!/. Con trol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar tif W SOWS 5 6.57761 2.70335 8.328611 225514 

100 5 5.52573 4.81399 8A0199 0.67973 

Graphic 

a a 

8 

t r ^ 

LO 

U 

^ 

, 

.e 

ar 

e , 

L6 

^ r 

a+ 

s: 

0. 1 

ae 

o 

Cone A 

Soo ,to -u •I.o as as as t.o u 

000 -092-101-1 CETISw 0.12reN Anatyst Approval: 

r 

ri 

r 

r 

. 

a.ruJls 

CH2M HUI 

1a 

-77-

BWEGRAU GACNRUrEFr 

clwt w.H...Ia/A/IAA/.drAw Tad . ,^ _ S-ocv 

Doreona s`^ ^+rlW5^ nwu^ Cool lJ._ u rn oen_^ .•^ ^'^^ n.r31 7 

code ^ `n 

cdr,a 

• l,e a. 1 to - w 

• [I..a. wAdndla WI 

rw 

rÂM rrN 

xdU. ur` 

rw" 0." 

rr 

MAd.c //•••c 

rd 

Âyngr[a^r • 

1"/1' ^wdr 

MAAw[ 

A 7~S 

. S 6 ^ 

wanrost. •• 

13i4+w 

0.&0 

Mnw. 

10.+Iw•d 

14 u S" , 

8 

n Qr 9 S 

rOn/hN^.MSew id^M'tr Owe s/6rdM N/ ./b/Ylrw.f^l WsNdmlMw'/+e. .^ 10 i 1 lvt 

A I 

A.o/ p 

PAW/ C 

• ApfotYO 

mud 

ca^pAay 

^- ^-. (v 

Rpb11[ 

New.wCbK Cm/ FI'/.wr+.Aab.eAÎA..I li..w Pl •hw êb rl.4 •y.Id1AI/M.A^4MYme1./WI • IM/I..Y+MAM.1w41w MooY11 Y./Wprw OJdAaq 

.IJ91 r.+f+A.M..c O^W.daol AM .^..a 

Ay/^dIA L Ig 1, f- ' 

• 

A.p.wb[ w ^.` .. ' 

A.rkMO a b 1 1 3 +r al L. ,% 

A..s [ 

Y.sw LmlA.wt 

MMMAIMgddw/I.dI./ 

ldw. rw.dl 

r....wdwpe 

r.ir.^.rr..dry. 

tdl..wl•m 

7i 

IMCT—^Mm^ Mvmmm=^ — 

_^ jr^ •Qr^ 1... 

a.Awrtir.rA.e. 

• A./bbA 

apr• 

AAdorc . 

A"I O 

israra 

/ Ae Lmm 

+,w.ari.owd/.bwm 

IvwbMwo 

M. Fwio/A 

radw..8140 ob .d..m.w 

^ ^}R,*""î![7"'^7•^![ ^x.71.' ^'n^1•^^^.^ 

r Tmwa wdvA w 

9 9 To IL.3 cl-ru-.Am 

103y LAA 0 0. 4 

.G DSs. 1 0 3 

A o/ .3fe Insm 11 0131"




Test Link: 184440-98M15e802psB 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2M Hill 

Test No: 09.7104.7132 Test Type: PlantChroNa Duratbn: WA 

Start Date: 05 Apr-0S Protocol: ASTM E1983-02 (2002) Species: Poe "Dwerga 

Ending Date: D8 Water. Source: 

Setup Data: 05 APr-08 trine: 

Comments: recalculated Height and Length data July 19.2008 

Sample No: 087557.8523 Code: 81566.02 CIAm: 

Sample Data: 27 Mar-0S Material: Sol Project. 

Receive Date: Sourer Hanford 

Sample Age: 9d Dh 3tagon: 

Comments: Ji1J87 

Comparlson Summary 

Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL ChV PM3D Method 

07-0787-0778 % Gemdnadon 100 > 100 WA 20.98% Equal Variants t Two-Ssmple 

154357-2988 • Average Height (mm) '100 WA 41.70% Equal Variance tTwo-Sample 

09.92081899 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 2-100 WA 39.19% Eque1 Variance tTwo-Sample 

12-3314-0779 Average Total Wt (Wek mg 100 >1Dg WA 37.41% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

075363.8775 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 • WA 34.99% Equal Variance t TwcrSample 

000-092-101-1 CETISw v/.1.2rev1 Analyst: Approval: 

-79-



Con@-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS S 0.84000 040000 1.00000 0.09795 021909 26.08% 

100 5 1.00000 1.000DO 1.60000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00% 

Average Height (mm) Summa ry . 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Mlnlmum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Ariftel SONS 5 75.780 81 84AOO 3.9903 8.9226 11.77% 

100 5 53AM 37.400 6S 5.0623 11.32 2141% 


Cones% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 ArOcial SONS 5 9122 50 117.40 11.4 25.491 27.94% 

100 5 60.600 43 65.1 3.9192 8.7636 14.46% 

Avenge AG Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 

Conc-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 29.605 12.333 36.826 • 4.3456 9.717 3252% 

100 5 18.574 8.11680 24.688 28451 6.3618 3425% 

Avenge AG Wt (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cone-Y, Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 4.96040 205668 626333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 3.08959 1.35000 441200 0.49767 1.11283 3825% 

Avers" Rod WL (Wet, mg) Summary 

Conc-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 36.878 13.317 46" 6.1616 13.778 37.36% 

100 5 28A94 10.788 41.768 53165 12335 4329% 

Avenge Rod WL (Dry, mg) Summary 

Cono-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Arf tWSOWS 5 1.61720 0.64!167 2.06331 025857 0.57819 35.75% 

100 5 1.36680 0.65400 1.BB400 022198 OA9537 36.3rA 


Conn% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 66.484 26.150 8277 10.452 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 47467 19.454 66.456 8.3444 18.659 39.64% 


Con" Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

O Ar08cial SOWS 5 637761 270335 8.32668 1.00853 225514 3429% 

100 5 4.43639 2D0400 532599 0.71728 1.60385 36.15% 



Teat Lark 1""O Q8051506021)313 

000-092-101-1 CEnSw v1.12revi Anayst 2_ r- Approval: 

-80-


% Germination Detail • . 



100 1.00000 t.bOODO 1.00000 1.110000 1.00000 

Average height (mm) Detail 

Conc-% Control Type Rep 1 Rap 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Arti6dal So8lS 61 84A000 7&6000 80.7 77 

100 65 48.8 37.4000 53ADOO 54.8 



0 Artificial SOWS 50 117.400 99.8000 88 7 1022 

100 64,8000 632000 45 65.6 64.4000 

Average AG Wt (Wet, m9) Detail 

Cones% Control Type Rap 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SoWS 12.8333 3&8260 31.748 35.76 30.54 

100 22A64 16.156 8.66002 NAM 209920 



0 Artificial SOWS 2.05668 &05200 526000 626333 5.17000 

100 3.94199 2.60798 1.35000 4.01200 3.43600 


Cone-A. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 13.3167 452540 36.3420 46.99 42.488 

100 •36.6980 21.8880 10.788 41.768 31.3280 


Cono-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 


100 1.88400 1.09600 0.65400 1.71799 1.48201 

Average Total Wt (We% mg) Detail 


0 Artificial SOWS 26.1500. 82.0800 68.0900 82.77 73.328 

100 59.16 38.046 19AS40 66ASS 5222 

Average Total Wit (Dry, mg) DWII 

Cores% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 


100 5.82599 3.70398 2.00400 5.73000 4.91799 



Test IJrdc: 15.6440-98Ml56802p36 

000-092-101-1 CETISTM vl.12revl Analyst_` Approval: 

-81-



Report bate: 19 JUM B:43 AM 

Analysts: 07-078747768756602pa8 

Ptant Bioassay . Chronic CH2M Hilt 

Endpoint Analysis Type SamploUnk ControlUnk Date Analyzed Version 

Comparison 

%. Germination 

156440.0806 158440.9896 19 Jul-06 8:43 AM CETISv1.12 


Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C'3-T Anpulef (Corrected) 100 3-100 1 WA 20.96% 


Control vs Con" Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Decision(0.05) 

Artificial SoWSedl 100 -1.633 1.85955 0.9294 020017 Nm-SIpNOcant Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square 

F Statistic P Value Declslon(0.05) 

Between 0484348 0.084348 1 267 0.14111 NonSlgniOCent Effect 

Error 02530439 0.031630 0 

Total 0.33739194 0.1159785 9 


Attribute Test Ststistio Critical P Vaius Deeision(0.01) 

Variances Modified Levene 4.60000 1125862 0.05954 Equal Variances 

Distributlon Shapiro-Wilit W 0.81413 0.02153 Normal Dlstributfan 


Conc-Y• Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SoWS 5 0.810011 0.60000 1A0000 021909 1.16160 0.85608 1.34528 025152 

100 5 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 OA0000 1.34528 1.34525 1.34528 0.00020 

Graphic 

• 

a a ' r 

o ' 

45 

a 4 

Q.3 4:s 'r r 

r 

U 4 r 

an 

s 

tort-. 

100 as -L5 -10 45 U is u is 

nassits 

000-092.101-1 CETISTM W.12revl Analyst Approval: 

, 

r 

r 

td 

-82-


Compa risons: Pap 2of 9 

Report Data: 19 Jui-06 8:43 AM 

Analysis: 1 S035T-2986181568D2psB 

Plant Bioassay. Chronic CH2M we 

Endpoint Analysis Type SamplsUnk ControlUnk DateAnsyM Version 

Average Height (mm) Comparison 156440-9898 168440.9898 19 Jul-06 8:43 AM CETISv1.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Ate NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Un tranaformed



Report Date: 19 JuWS 9:17 AM 

Analysis: 180101-195MI56602psB 

PWM Bloassay-Chronic CN2M H18 

Endpoi ntAnalysis Type Sample Link Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average Length (mm) Compa ri son 154440-9898 15.6440.9898 19 Jul-OB 9:1T AM CETISv1.12 


Equal Vadance l Two-Sample C> T Unearobnned 11




Ana"&: 04-225 W54187 56602psB 

Plant Bicasssy-Chrordc C142111 Nil 

Endpoint Type Semple Unk Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Comparison 18b440-91199 1tr04409896 19JuW8&43AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt N Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Tonle Units ChV PMSD 

Equal VariancelTwoSampte C>T Unkansformed 11,100 100 WA 32.82% 


Control va Cone-Y• statistic Critical P-Value MSO Daeiekn(0.05) 

ArtificialSOWSedl 100 2.12393 1.85955 0.0332 9.BS888 S00cantEOect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statktic P-Value Declslon(0.08) 

Between 304.255 304253 1 441 0.00842 Non•SlgnificantElfect 

Error 

S7A484 8 

Total 843AM33 371.70141 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Decblon(OA7) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.33292 23.15450 0.43209 Equal Vxiar cm 

Distrlbulbn Shapiro-W9k W 0.83430 0.03789 Normal Distribution 


Conc.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 WWI SOWS 5 29.605 12.833 38128 9.717 

100 5 18.574 8.8660 24.088 5.3818 

Graphics 

g t 

r ' r 

0 

0 

Ca K-% 

rro .te •Ls •tA i3 OA 0.3 to 1a 

Rsnldb 

000-092.101-1 CETIS'• %1.12rev1 Anaystr 3 Approval 

r 

r r 

r 

3A 

-85-



Report Dale: 19 J" &43 AM 

Analysts: 10-274-8929IB156W2ps8 

Plant Bloassay _ Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sampla Unk Co ntrol Unk Date Analyzed Version 

Comparison 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) 

15.6440.9898 1564405898 19 Ju405 &43 AM CETISA.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform zeta NOt7, l.OEL Tornio Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Tw"ampie C>T Untramtbrmed


Comparisons: Page Sot 9 

Report Data: 19 Jut-N &43 AM 

Analysis: 00.9085•6347B156e02psB 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CH2M HIS 


Average Raul WL (Wet, m9) Comparison 1584409898 1544409898 19 Jul-06 5:43 AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL TosicUnits ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwoSompia C>T Untransfomrad 1100 >100 1 -WA 41.70% 


Control vs Cone•% Statistic. Critical PValue MSD Dseision(0. 

Artificial Soll/Sed 1D0 1.01382 1.65955 0.1702 15.379 NonSignifl ant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic P Vaus Deeision(0.05) 

Between 175.7511 175.7511 1 1.03 0.34035 NonSlgnMont Effect 

Error 1367.951 170.9939. 6 

Total 1543.70190 34&74495 • 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Value Dxislon(0.01) 

Vadances Variance Ratio F 124753 23.15450 0.83546 Equal Variances 

Dlstrlbution Shapiro-waw 0.57920 0.12775 NormalDlstrOullcn 

Data Summary Original Data Transformed Dais 

Cone-% Control Type Court Moan Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SoillS 5 36A75 13.317 45.99 13.776 

100 5 2&494 10.788 41.788 12235 

Graphics 

.. 

1 

t 

0 

r 

r 

,r 

r 

-, r 

0 100 •10 -is -/A is 44 0.1 is 1.1 to 

canc.% tlansks 

000-092.101-1 CETIS" VIA2reA Analysh &" Approval 

. 

r , 

r 

r 

r 

r 

, 

_87_


Comparisons: Pagi7of 9 

Report Data: 19 JuW6 6:49 AM 

Analysts: 09.92D6.189981 VjWZpsB 

Plant Bioassay • Chron ic CH2M H91 

Fndpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Da ta Anatyxsd Ve rs ion 

Average Root WL (Dry. mg) Compa rison ' tSb440-9686 156440.0896 19 JuF06 8:43 AM CETISV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform =NOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance l Two Rample C> T Untrsnsformed 100 >100 1 WA 39.19% 

Group Co nparlsorw 

Co ntrol vs Cone,% Statist ic Critical P Value MSD Decfston(0.05) . 

Artificial SdVSedl 100 (173477 1.85955 02417 0.63371 NonStgifiant Effe ct 

ANOVATabte 

Source Stan of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic RVahts Dacleion(0.05) 

Between 0.1567499 0.15675 1 0.54 0.48348 Non•SlpJffcantEOed 

Error 2322712 0290339 8. 

Total 2.47946206 0.4470889 9 

ANOVA Assumpt ions 

Att ribute Test Steustle Critical P-Value Dectslor(0.01) 

Varlanas Variance Ratio F 1.35685 23.15450 0.77462 Equal Variances 

DlsbYtution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.87393 0.11105 Normal Dis tribution 


Cono-SG Control Type Count Mean - Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maxhnum . SO 

0 ArbftW SOWS 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 0.57819 

100 5 1.36800 0.65400 1.88400 0A9W7 

Graphic 

8 

g 

a 

U 

os 

- ------ --------- ------ irgeara^ - 

r 

e ' 

r 

r. . 

@A $ ¢ r 

t 

w 

Sr i 

t 

00 

e tro •u -u -tr as oa c u tS ZA 

000-092-101.1 CETISTM V1.12revi Analyst ?T" . AppmM: 

a 

•^r 

r 

^ 

-88-




Analysis: 123314-MM 56602psB 

Plant Bioassay. Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpolnt Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analysed Ve rsion 

Average Total Wt (Wei mg) Comparison 158440.9898 154"0.9898 19 Jul-06 8:43 AM CEf1Svl.12 

Method At H Data Transform ZaL NOEL LOEL Toxic Unlit ChV PUSO 

Equal Va ri ance l Two-Sample C>T Untransformed 100 >100 1 . WA 37A7% 


Critical 

Control vs Conn% Statistic 

P-Valve MSD Deetsion(0.05) 

Ar118cial Sd ySedl 100 1.4518 1.85955 0.0923 24.8697 Nor SigniBrant E ffect 

'ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value OscWon(0.05) 

Between 942.4918 942.49111 1 211 0.18162 NcnSgnlfirdrd Effe ct 

Error 3577.302 447.1627 8 

Total 4519.79327 ' 1389.8544 9 


AHrlbute Test Statistic Critical 0.Valus Deelslon(0.01) 

Va riances Variance Rat io F 1.56883 23.15450 0.67326 Equal Va riances 

Distribu tion Shapko•Wdk W 0.85802 0.6847 Normal Distr ibution 


Conc-% Control Type Court Mean Minimum M ax imum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 ArliBdal SONS 5 66.484 28,13 52.77 23.370 

100 5 47.067 19A54 6GA56 18.659 

Graphic 

t 20 

t 

1 

t • r 

^ t 

r 

, 

r 

t ^ 

' e e 

r 

0 

a too 

so 

.io -u -tor as 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

oa os w u u 

Cerrotlr aanlub 

090.092-101-1 CET1Sr" vl.12revl Analyst tin- Approval. 

ere 

-8'9-

CE nS Analysis Detail 



Analysis: 07-5363877515156602ps8 

Plant Sloassay- Chronic CH2M Hill 

Endpoird Analysis Type Sample Link Co ntrol Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 15-81409898 15.6440.9898 19 JuW6 8:43 AM CETISv1.12 

Method All H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxl0 Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untgrreknned 11100 >100 1 WA 34.99% 


Control vs Cone-ye Statistic Critical P Vohs M80 Dscision(0.05) 

Artificial SoWSedt 100 1.73017 1.85956 0.0609 2.30133 Non•Solf1ca nt Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Moan SquareDF F StatkDc P-Value Declsion(0.05) 

Between 11.46197 11.46197 1 2.99 0.12185 Nan4gilBpntEffect 

Error 30.6319 3.828987 a 

Total 42.0938644 15290956 9 


A14ibute Test Sta tistic Critical P-Value D•clalon(0.01) 

Variances Variance RaOo F 1.97707 23.15450 0.52535 Equal Varlances 

Distribution Shaplo-Wilk W 0.84141 0.04587 NormalDistibubon 

Data Summ ery Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minlmum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SLAVS 5 8.57761 2.70335 8.32888 225514 

100 5 4.43639 2.00400 5.82599 1.60385 

Graphics 

a L9. 

4 

e 

at 

h e..1 

to 

e 

mr 

•^• 

• r 

W i 

0.1 

• • 

r 

i 

r 

1 

all 

ere 

i 

1 

s 

Con e-% 

r • 

too •z4 •u .ter ss as u u u 

ItarmMlb 

000-092-101.1 CEMW V1.12reA Analyslti b App roval: - 

r 

r 

t.o 

-90-

1I.r•+ 51e "%t 

1xs+ur l.p/r,./ 

1.1/+.•+x1 

wrR/ROettwrtt 

Tw..:.r.1rR 

h1•'•/R...O 

B.as/Rr/rr•R.z 

P*1 A 

FAF u s 

Rwrc 

Rq/ar0 

Rwk/ l 

BLUEGRASS OROWTXTEST 

CMK W-W%wcbRnm Amw Twswoft Q $_Ole 

Op/ OqR-.2- ^ OgIFSLM onngcL- 0/G-^ cw >t^' 

coma REPLICATE Cl/j/ NRry1 

rIR w 

viva" /r+v 

conbd 

Lab 6 No 

I ///e/ Srldnwe WI 

EÎ/^9eRe 

A/ry/ 1 9 41/ 

w w 

rG•+^ /rx+ 

21M I SS/R/ w w 

f #W" 

P= 

S ^^ 

A W ^J 

c D 1 2 ^S 

0 

e 

TOy/ hrr C••m•RS trwwry /4 Mrr/t'w/rp e^.•M/rbr/•r•.pt o.c^.r.r^/..rs 

MA" PM. N nPOS1 

, 1 /y/w 

rI•x^0 

1 4//w 

/o40 

//ML 

S.W. 

a Mu/M/•R• 

/•••t••.AI 

•^, N 

Rlpa/e 

Rs/vl.e 

I C.y ls , 3 Lry t s... G 

•('lam ls. l.,1. fr 

rnw.,d • ^ s.,. tr 

n...t. _ • 2 .4 le F '{ S..ì ► ( MA7.-^l? ^ [^^3^ 

mw o 

L-2 (r 

AG/v/rt•1c Om/WtilM+mtr.M•b•y /wr Rl•MO^mrrsr4 / 4•Irr/•Irr RtilMreW. AW •/r/I^r b^••MMr9S1•wrsy/M•Rrr/r•rlHNmr) 

^•on./ra•../.•R o^•4/rmla/^s 

R•(4/rA (r ((. .r / 1.0.x" 

R./r•rC b v 

wporB .. •l 

R•R1we 1 l.^Cr_ 1 4. 1 /N} Gw/ 1 n s11.>+^_ 1 S_ (y 

^ R/rtIV41 

rR.G/nI1 A•/4r MbplRr 

A/s b •wM 

Y R W= 

Trx/ mrrRari/R r.ra►q/ 

—mmr _—R— mw=^ mmmr=^mmmr- A^^^' 

T!"M 1 • •4 ' t4i^.Imof/s3m 

iM-m-fl_`jT)Îmm-^ • ^^ 

..

CETIS Test Summary. 

Page / of 3 

Report Data 19 Jul-08 921 AM 

Test Unk: 10-48567465l8156803psC 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CHZM Hill 

Test No: 0533524510 Test Type: Plant Chronic Duration: WA 

Start Date: 05 Apr-05 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Spades: Poo sandber04 

Ending Date: Oil Water: Source: 

Setup Date 05Apr-06 Brine 

Comments: • recalculated Height and Length data July 19, 2006 

Sample No: 03.3130-0104 Code: B156603 Client: 

Sample Dots: 30 Mar•06 Material: Scd Project: 

Receive Date Source: Hanford 

Sample Age 6d Oh Station: •' 

Comments: J11JH5 


Analysis Endpoint NOEL LOEL ChV PMSO • Method 

094240-7124 % Germination 100 >100 WA 41.99% Wkoxon Rank Sum TwoSample 

OQ9654.0043 Average Height (mm) 100 >100 WA 19.95% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

033823.1455 Average Length (mm) 100 WA 44.73% Equal Variance ITwo-Samgs 

13.4570-8780 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 100 >100 WA 5220% Equal Variance t TwoSampie 

10-81154404 Average Root Wt. (Wet, mg 100 > 100 WA 6215% Equal Varlarce tTwo-Sample 

0616662616 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 7274% Equal Variance lTwo-Swr0s 

17-7998-0152 Average Total Wt (Wet, mg 100 > 100 WA 54.13% Equal Variance It TwoSanple 

07-127"134 Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) 100 3-100 WA 55.73% Equal Variance t Tw o-Sample 

000-092-101-1 CETIS'a vl.12MA Analyst:.- Approval: 

NEW 

-92-



Cone',. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SO SD CV 

0 ArUfidai SOWS 5 0.84000 0.60000 130000 0.09798 021909 26.08% 

1D0 5 0.84000 020000 1.00000 016000 0.35777 42.59% 

Average Helpht (mm) Summary 

Cone-% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SO SD CV 

0 ArUBdal SOUS 5 75.780 61 84.400 3.9903 8.9226 11.77% 

100 5 63.04 43 83 7.0853 15.843 25.13% 


Papa 2 of 3 

Report Data: 19 AA-08 921 AM 

Test Uni: 1D4856-74658758803psC 

Cona% Control Type Repo Mean Minimum Maximum St: SD CV 

0 Anifidal SOWS 5 9122 50 117.40 11.4 25.491 27.94% 

100 5 . 57.800 41A00 73 6.0256 13A74 23.31% - 

Average AGWt (Wet. mg)Summary 

Cone.% CordrolType Reps Mean Minimum Maximum Sri so CV 

0 ArbWal SOWS 5 29.805 12.833 38.828 4.3458 9.717 3212% 

100 5 23.626 11.180 43.08 5.6416 - 12-615 53.39% 

Average AG Wt (Dry. mg) Summary . 

Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Mlnlmum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 AM" SOWS 5 4.96040 2.05668 626333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 424840 2.12800 851001 1.16886 211365 6152% 


Cona% Control Typo Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Arlifidal SOWS 5 36.878 13.317 48.99 6.1618 13.7]8 3736% 

100 5 32.477 11.544 70.600 10.675 23.871 T350% 

Average Root Wt. (Dry, m9) Summary 


0 Ar6fival SOWS S 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 025WT 0.57819 35.75% 

100 5 2.03540 0.94800 3.45001 0.57735 1.29098 63AG% 


Cone-/*Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 - ArtIftW SOWS 5 66.484 28.150 112.77 t0A52 23.370 35.15% 

1D0 5 56.103 22.704 113.66 16.289 36.423 64.92% 


Cono-% Control Type Raps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Are6tial SOWS 5 6.5776 2.7033 83267 10085 22551 3429% 

100 5 62848 3.0760 1122 1.6937 3.7873 0026% 

000-092-101-1 CETisw v1.12rovi Analyst_-I-Approval: 

-93-


%Germination Detall 


0 AMU SOWS 0.30000 1.00000 1.00000 0.80000 1.00000 

100 1X0000 1X0000 1.00000 020000 1.00000 

Average Height (mm) [3"' 


0 Artfidal So17S 61 54A000 75.8000 00.7 77 

100 63 43 73.2 ' 83 53 

Average Length (mm) Dalall 


0 Artifical SOWS 50 117.400 99.0000 66.7 102.2 

100 ' 59 41A000 69ADW 73 472000 

Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) Derail 

Conc-Y. Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep S 

0 ArtiWal SolVS 128333 36MW 31.748 3538 30.84 

100 20.1060 11.1600 26.4280 43X6 1&3760 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Detall 

Cone-Y, Control Type Rep Rep 2 Rep Rep Reps 

0 Artificial SOWS 2.05688 6.05200 3.26000 8213333 &17000 

100 328001 2.12600 4.90200 8.51001 2.44199 


Cone-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rap 4 Rep 5 

0 ArDWai SOWS 13.3167 452540 36.3420 46.99 42A08 

100 21.1200 11,544 40.554 70.6000 1858 

Average Root WL (Dry, mg) Detall 



1DD 1.19199 0.94800 3A4401 3.45001 1.149D0 

Avenge Total Wt (Wet, mg) Detail 


0 Artificial Sdys 2&1500 820800 98.0900 SZ77 73.328 

100 412360 227040 68A 11168 33.938 



0 Artificial SOWS 2.70335 7.99000 6.78801 &32680 7.09000 

100 4A5200 3.07600 &34601 11.9600 358999 

000092-101.1 


Report Data: 19 J" 9'.21 AM 

Test LInic 10.4858d465IB156603psC 

-94- 

CEnsw v1.1z" Analyst 2` AWMI:_


Report Date: 19 Jd-0 BA7 AM 

Analysts: 094240.71241B136603psC 

Plsnt Bioassay-Ch ronle CH2M Hi ll 


Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link DateAnslyzsd Version 

% Gemitn26on Comparison 10.4866.7465 10-4858.7465 19 J" &47 AM CETISV7.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic units ChV PMSD 

Wlcoxon Rank SUrn Two-Sample C>T Rank 11100 >100 1 . WA 41.99% 


Control vs Cone.% Statistic Critical P•Value Ties Deeiston(0.05) . 

ArhficiWSoi l/Sedl100 29 0.5794 3 NonSipril0eanlE ffect 

ANOVATable 

SourceSum of Square$ Mean Squa reOF F Statistic P-Value Dedston(0.05) 

Between D.OD01352 0.000135 1 0.00 0.97281 Non•Slpnifianl Effect 

Ertor 0.8748688 0.109359 B 

Total 0.87500388 0.1094938 9 

ANOVAA"umptlons 

Attribute Test 3taiistle Critical P-Value Deciaton(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2A5738 23.15450 OA0518 Equal Variances 

DistrIbAon Shawo-Wllkw 045938 0.00028 Nan-normal Db0bil8a1 

Da ta Summery Original Data Transformed Data 

Conca:G Control Type Count Mean Mlnlmum Maximum SD Mean 

Minimum 

Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SdpS 5 0.84000 0.80000. 1,40000 021909 520000 2.50000 7.001X10 2,46475 

1D0 5 0.84000 020000 1 110000 0.35777 5.80000 1.DWW 7.00000 2.68328 

Graphics 

F 

a4 r r 

r 

1 r 

a+ 

-t M7i- 

4 

, 

• • ' 

al 1 

0 

COrIL`Y^ 

r 

, 

• • • 

no •a.0 -LO •la -U eo OS L 4s 

Raumtlb 

CETIS" v1.12red AnalystL Z' P- Approval: 

is 

-95-

CETIS'Analysis Detail 


Report Date: 19 Jul 06 8:47 AM 

Analysis: 00.9854.004381566OW 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic- CH2M H91 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unk Date Analysed Verslon 

Averape Height Comparison • 10-4856-7485 1048567463 19 M-06 &47 AM CEfISv1.12 


Equal Variance l Two-Sample C> T Untralaformed 11100 >100 1 WA 19.95% 


Control vs Cone•% statistic Critical P•Value MSO Daeiston(0. 

Artificial SOIVSem 100 1.58872 1.85955 0.0779 15.1212 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Sta ti s ti c P-Value D"Won(0.05) 

Between 405.7891 4057691 1 2,45 0.15582 Non•SignilicantFJleet 

Error 132248 165.31 8 

Total 1728.24905 571.07907 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical p Val" D•elslon(0.01) 


Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.96968 0.88768 Normal Dlsblbu8ar 


Conr1% Control Type Court Man Minknum Maximum SD Mann Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial So0/S 5 75780 61 54A 8.9228 

100 5 63.04 43 83 15.843 

Graphlea 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 

0 

0 

core Y 

• 

e 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 • 

1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1111 

700 •IA •1.S •1,p -0S Oa OS 1A 3.1 

MU22-101-1 CETiS m %1.1.2nM Analyse' Approval: 

Reakits 

>A 

-96-

CETIS Analysis Detail. 


Report Date: 19 J" 921 AM 

Analysis: 03J823.145%9I W6W psC 

Plant Bioassay • Chronic CH2M H18 

EndpointAnslysis Type Sample Unk ControD Link Date Anslyssd Version 

Average Length (mm) Comparison 104858-7485 10.4856-7485 19 Jul-N 9:21 AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Un its ChV PMSD 

,Equal Variance It C>T UMraMlomled < 00 

1 

100 WA 282996 


Control vs Cono.% Statis tic Critical P-Value MSD Declslon(O.Or7 

ArOAUalS oil/SecU100 2.59185 1.85056 0.0160 ' 239775 Significant Effect 

ANOVATable - 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareDF P Statistic P Value Decbion(0.0 5) 

Between 2792.241 2792241 1 8.72 0.03202 Signi ficant Effect 

Error 3325248 415.656 8 

Total 011TA8577 32071967 9 


Attribute Test Sta tistic Critical P•Value Daeision(O.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 357922 23.15450 024448 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapko•Wlikw 093777 0.52849 NormalDNstrlbUBM 

Data Summary Ortyinall Data Transformed Data 

Cone-Y. Co nt rol Type Count MeanMinimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar0fidal SOWS 5 91.22' 50 117.4 25.491 

100 5 57.800 41.4 73 13.474 

Graphics 

MW 30 

Q 20. ^ 

i • 

i ^ • 

i 

Wad` 

s i r 

f 

0 no •7a -LS •1a -0.f 0.0 OS Id is 7A 

• r 

Coeo-Y^ Rawkks 

000 -092-101-1 CETISw y1.12MA Analyst $ Approval; 

-97-



Report Ddb: 19 Jul-06 6:47 AM 

Analysis: 03-2295-536718158803psC 

Plant Bioassay, • Chronic CWM Hui 

I . 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Link Data Analyzed version 

Average AGWt(We% mg) Comparfsai 104856.7465 10-4856.7465 19JuW68:47AM CEnSv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOE1 Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance l Two-Sample C>T Un"nalormed 11100 >100 1 WA 44.73% Was 


Control vs Conc-Y. Statist ic Criti ca l P Value MSD D•dsion(0.05) 

Ar tificial SoWSed 100 0.83967 1.65955 02127 132423 NonSIgN6oarit Ef ed 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares . Mean Sq uare 

OF F Statis ti c P Valor DeoisionM.05) 

Between 

E 

89.35481 89.38461 1 0.71 0.42548 NonSVIdIcantE6e ct 

rr or 1014.24 128.76 8 

Total 1103.6245 210.16477 9 


Attnbut• Test Statistic Crit ic al P-Value Deeislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 1.68545 23.15450 0.62545 Equ al Variances 

Dislricutiom Shapiro-Wdk W 0.97199 0.901105 Normal Distribu tion 


Conn-% Control Type Count Mean M inimum Maxlrrsm SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SONS 5 29.605 12.1133 56.825 9x17 

100 5 23.628 11.160 43.06 12.615 

Graphics 

t r • 

g 1 

8 

1 

r 

^ ' 

^ 

1 i 

1 ^ i 

0 

r 

i 

r 

r 

• r 

r 

0 100 -LA -La .ta 43 0a a1 iA u LO 

CONK-" pnYtlt 

OW-092.101-1 =STM V1.12WMalysC ^" Approval: 

-98-

CETIS Analysis Detail ' 


Report Data: 19 Jul-06 3:47 AM 

Analysis: 13-4570.316381566D3psC 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic CH2M HID 

Endpoint . Analysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Data Analyzed version 

Average AG WI (Dry, mg) Canparlsorl 10.4856.7465 104356-7465 19 Jul-06 &47 AM CETISv/.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zats I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance lTwo-Sample C>T llntansformed 1100 >100 1 WA 5220% 

Group Compariso0s 

CoMrd vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Dedslon(0.00 

Artitidal Solusedl 100 0.51132 1.85958 0.3115 2.58933 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic IN-Value Deebion(0.05) 

Between 126735 125735 1 023 0.62294 Non-S Effect 

Error 311.7791 4.847388 8 

Total 40.0464520 6.1147375 9 


Attribute Test St•tistio Critical P-Value Deeislon(0.01 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.38550 23.15050 OA2D40 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapiro-W& W 0.94807 0.64572 Normal Distrmurion 


Com:-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mein Minknlan Maximum SD 

0 Art tidal SLAYS S 4.96D40 2.05666 626333 1.69222 

100 5 424840 2.12800 8.31001 2.81365 

Graphics 

Le 

} 

a 

g 

as 

a 

al 

40 

a 

Cane-% 

i 

1 • 

r 

r 

r 

r 

2 1 1 • 

r 

r 

.y • 1 

Ins - .ye -IS -tor au oa of >A >s 

000.092-101-1 CEnswv1.1.2revl Analyst: S- Approval: 

I 

1 

Manias 

10 

-99-


Comparisons: 

papa Of 9 

Report Dat6: 19 JuWS 8:47 AM 

Analysis: 1681 * 44041815W3psC 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic C112M HUI 

Endpoint Analysis Typo SampkLhlk Control Link DatoAnahyced Version 

Average Root WL (Wet, mg) Comparison 10-4858.7485 10-4856.7485 19 Jul-06 8:47 AM CETISv1.12 

Method AN H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal VariancetTwoSampk C>T Untransfamled 11100 >100 1 WA 821894 


Control vs Con" Statistic Critical P Value MSD Decklon(0.05) 

Artificial SolUSed 100 0.35705 1.85958 0.3651 229207 No►SIpNBoant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Square Man Square OF F Statistic P Value Dselslot(0.05) 

Between 48.42058 4BA2055 1 0.13 0.73029 Non-SigniBrantEffect 

Error 3038.583 3748229 8 

Total 3087.00350 42824343 9 

ANOVAMsumptk m 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Value Deckion(o.01) 


Dis0ibullon Shapiro.WOk W 0.92487 0.39940 Normal DisirtbWat 


Cone=/. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SoNS 3 36.878 13.317 46.99' 13.778 

100 5 32A77 11.544 70.600 23.871 

Graphics 

g r 

e 

$err 

420, 

r 1 

1 

1 

t • 1 

1 

1 

1 

5 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 1 1 

e 1 

a IN 

CEf10-N 

1• 

1 

ao -La -La -as e e ra 3.5 

000.092-101-1 CEns m v1.1.2revl AnslysC TY 

-1 oo 

Approval` 

ea"I tte 

• 

to




Analyala: 0616662616187 58803psC 

Plant Noassay - Chronic CH2111 H01 

Endpoint Analysis Typa Sampl•Unk Control Link DateAnalyssd Version 

Aveta9e Root Wt. (Dry, mg) Comparison 104856.7485 10-48567465 19 Jul-06 &47 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Unto 7ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Untra isformod 100 >100 1 - 72.74% 


Controlvs 

Arty SoWedl 

Cone-% 


Sta6sw 

-0.0627 

Critical 

1.85955 

P•VSWe 

0.7369 

MSD 

1.17838 

Dedslon(0.0 

Non.S$ n rant Eff 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P-Value Dscision(0.0 

Between OA393268 OA39327 1 0.44 0.52617 Non-Significant Effect 

Error 8=755 1.000489 8 

Total 8.44308144 1.4397981 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Vatu• D•elsion(0.01) 

Varlenmes Variance Ratio F 4.98547 23.15450 0.14882 Equal Variances 

Distribution Shapko-WllkW 0.88496 0.14671 Normal DlstribuBdt 


Cone-Y, Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Near Minimum Maximum 31) 

0 Artificial SOUS 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 0.57819 

100 3 203640 0.94800 3A5001 129098 

Graphics 

.. I r 

r 

• 

to 

r 

g 

a 

4 ____--______________—____Ay;oTy 

r • 

r• 

"""""' r """"""" 

II 

s 

r 

r 

02 

v 

• 

• • r 

rr 

00 

• 

lone-% 


40 -Lf •40 -03 0A O.f LO !1 

000-092.101.1 CET1Snrv1.12reN Ana lyst 2S" Approval• 

IUNdts 

L 

—1 1—


Comparisons: Pageed 9 


Analysis: 17 7998-01521B156603psC 

Plant Bloessay • Chronic CH2M H ill 


Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) ' Compadsan 1048567465 104858.7468 19 A4-06 8:47 AM CETISrt.12 

Method ' Alt H Data Transform Zeft I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C>T Untraro(amed 1100 >100 1 WA 54.13% 


Control vs Cono-Y. SbWtlo Critical P-Value MSD Dedsion(O." 

Artificial SoWSedl 100 0.53638 1.85955 03032 3&989 Non-Significant E1Ted 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares. Mean Square OF F Statis ti c P-Value Deelsion(0.05) 

Between 269.3819 289.3819 1 029 0.6D630 Non-SOftent Effe ct 

Enor 7491238 936.4048 8 

Toal 7760.62021 1205.7867 9 


Anribute Test Sfttla tic Critical P-Valve D•cftion(D.01) 

Variances Variance Ra ti o F 2.42893 23.15450 0.41109 Equal Variances 

Distribu tion Shapiro-WOW 0.94678 0.63064 Normal Disirtation 


Cone-Y. Co ntrol Type Count Mea n Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 66A84 28.15 82.77 23.370 

100 5 5&103 22.704 113.68 36.423 

Graphics 

1 1 • 

s s i 

7^ 1 

1 

yy 

7 

1 

1 

1 

^ 1 

II 

r 1 

to 

i 

1• 

• • 

1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

0 Sa 

0 

Lao 

-LO -LS -la -as OA 0.f 14 td 

' 

Comma 

000 -092-1014 CETISW V1.12evl Anatys _ Approval:_ 

sarlkb 

1A 

-102-


Comparisons: Pape g ot 9 

Report Date: 19Jul-098.47 AM 

Analysis: 07.1279•41346156603psC 

Plant Bloassay • Chronle CH2M HID 

Endpobd Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Date AnalyzedVersion 

Averape Total Wt (Dry, m0) Comparison 104856.7465 101856.7465 19 M-05 &47 AM CETI".12 

MetMrd Aft H Data Translone 2.eu NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it s ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwoSample C 2-T UnbanslonrW 11100 2-100 1 . WA 55.73% 


Control vs Cone-% Stowle Critical P Vahre MW DeCWW(0. 

ArtifcialSoNedl 100 0.14854 1.85955 0.4428 3AS564 NonSpWOpnlElfect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa reDF F Statistic P Value Deelsion(0.05) 

Between 02143312 0214331 1 0A2 0.85500 NonSignifwanlEBed 

Eno 77.71887 9.714800 8 

Total 77.9311967 9.9288394 9 

ANOVAAssumptions - 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Vatus Dedsion(0.01) 

Variances ( Variance Ratio F 2.82040 23.15650 0.33935 Equal Variances 

Distr(Wttion Shapiro-WA W 0.94597 0.52111 Normal Dish button 


Conc.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Arsficial SONS 5 6.57761 2.70335 8.32686 225514 

100 5 825480 3.07600 11.9800 3.78729 

Graphics 

gall, 

a .a- 

0.01 

a 

carW% 

Lo r 

LO r 

r 

r 

r 

- r 

r 

r 

r 

im ,LO -L4 -ta 45 Ca as La u 

saws 

000-092.101-1 CETIS^ v1.12 I Analyst Approvet 

r 

• 

7.0 

-103-

Co.*• w^l.gbn cs...R.r.eP.*d TWSMM 4' s. 04. 

p^ 

D.IE^ Dry1t D" o.r N llV " to DqA o"234 a— ^'u ^ D•1' .J^^ 

CoRC'. IePl1CA1[ 

• 

ca" 

rbr ►rNwrErec f.MM//MA.r bE E..AYp pw.Ni 

R.I.MA s^^ , I,..6 f Is.•.! 

RWkM LA. 

..r...D 34tiG 2.w.^. Cs Rc 

Ry1M[ J 4s Lr ^ 

AIIw..d C.O. D.r FI •IwI.^. M.rrMs.A, •.+. Pl'Nr M....r, 

A.pR.bA 

RE+ab. / LSla, 

G .. 

a M^Cr, 

1 $ 'F. 

1 5... 

Rswre 3 Ls(^•^ ^ ttib w/ ! ^1 

E.F.Ar R.D+r.wA..r•• 

be...•..N 

ur...EAe WOO 

T. ..rrr •.r•v. 

Ir.• V-4 

D..•.m1MV.sf 

FA( A 

Rwkb• 

R.p.bc 

R.I.MD 

R.pwrc 

rMw RV.lt.q•e 

^..p•rrb.•...r 

I.w ^r w..•• 

w...R.rw.pe 

1W rtlriee►br..rb•. 

B Ub6. S /I SO? /b: 

Eff-p 

+=M "dma&" 

rww• M.R^• Mr• 

A r0' 

14 

• 

it_M 

/r• 

.[E.EDE gDNNYR 

AM A_ME 

W." pa" 

D Z' 7• AS 

D cy 7S 

[ 1 0 +sS 

D..•. Ipp ..w. 

tw^wwt 

wt 

A 00• fs 

/02 .a 

lfl.4. 

JawL. 

o .50 

lost. S 

2 2 12c] o l0 IT 

1010,16 8.00 

*," 

R E Kf IZSK 10-19-g. 10 

- ro^y.7n 

1^CyAEYR•aIEOwEcEr. 'Aqm^[^"Cr^. 

I. Iw••R•. 

00" 

•p.m 

122M•.A+ 

DII 

EEID1 

rE/•l 

q rM Pe.► 

IO V.••1 ^,^ 

. V ^•^•

CET1S Test Summary 


Report Date: 19 Jd-W 924 AM 

Test Urda 13$778-5451MI56604p3C 

Plant l3loassay-Clronio CH2M HUI 

Test No: 12.96232194 Test Type: PlantChronle Duration: WA 

Start Date: 05 Apr-06 Protocol: ASTM E1963-02 (2002) Species: Poa sandberyi 

Ending Date:. DU Water. Source: 

Setup Date: Q5 Apr-06 Brine: 


Sample Ho: 11-86813420 Code: 8156604 CIMM: 

Sample Date: 04Apt-06 Material: SoU Project . 


Sample Age: 24h Station: 

Comments: J11JH8 



0680586098 % Germination 100 >100 WA 20.96% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

13-1607-1278 Average Height (mm) 100 >100 . 

WA 17.95% Equal Variance It Two-Sample 

11.26762306 Average Length (mm) 4100 100 WA 25.75% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

02-45974713 Average AG Wt (Wet, mg) 100 > 100 WA 3750% Equal Variance It TwoSan" 

155615.7255 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 39.71% Wkoxon Rank Sum Tw"ample 

04-10753129 Average Root WL (Wet, mg 100 > 100 WA 48.66% Equal Variance It Two-Sample 

05,96255204 Average Roof WL (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 WA 54.49% Equal Variatos tTwo-Sample 

173037-7664 Average Total Wt (Wet mg 100 >1D0 WA 43.45% Equal Variance ITwo-Sample 

003240.5620 Average Total Wt (Dry. mg) 100 > 100 WA 42.74% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

000-092-101-1 CETIS O1 vl.1.2rr4 Analyst_2 Approval: 

-105-


%Germination Summery 

Cono•% Control Type Reps Mean . Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 0.09798 021909 26.08% 

100 5 1.60000 1.00000 1.00000 9.66660 0.00000 0.00% 


Conn•'/. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum . Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Ar tificial SoiV3 5 75.780 61 84A00 3.9903 8.9226 11.77% 

100 5 64.8 48 81 6.1348 13.718 21.17% 


Cone-%• Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SdI/3 5 91.22 50 117.40 11A 25.491 27.94% 

100 • 5 55.720 34.6 64AN 5.4415 12.168 21.84% 

Average AG Wt (Wet, m2) Summary 

Conn% Control Type Reps ' Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SoIV5 5 29.605 12.833 36.828 43458 9.717 3282% 

100 5 24.881 10.352 34.758 4.0937 9.1638 36.79% 



0 Ad&WSolVS 5 4.96040 205668 626333 0.75679 1.69222 34.11% 

100 5 3.95120 1.17200 5.57001 0.74109 1.65713 41.94% 


Cone-Y. Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 


100 5 ' 30.544 4.5140 48.884 7.4266 18.608 53.84% 

Average Root WL (Dry, m g) Summary 


0 Ar06dal SoiVS 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.06331 025657 0.57819 35.75% 

100 5 1.61000 0.34401 292400 039717 0.88809 55.16% 

Average Total W t (Well, mg) Summary 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SofVS 5 68.484 28.150 8277 10A52 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 55.725 14.868 83.642 11.491 25.695 46.11% 


Cono•% Controliype Reps Mean Minimum Maximum SE SD CV 

0 Artificial SoWS 5 6.57761 2.70335 8.32666 1.00853 225514 3429% 

100 5 5.56120 1.51602 829399 1.12635 291859 4529% 

Pape201 3 

Report Dab. - 19JuMg*.24AM 

Test Unk: 13-0778545118156604psC 

000-092-101-1 CEnS° v1.12revt AnaysC Approval: 

-106-



Cone -% Control Type Rap 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 

0 Artificial SOiVS 0.60000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 1.00000 

100 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 

Average Haight (mm) Detail 

Conc-% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4. Rep 5 

0 Artificial SONS 61 04.4000 75.8000 80.7 77 

100 624000 46 75 59.6 51 

Average Length (mm) Detail . 


0 Are6dal SONS W 117.400 99.8000 86.7 1022 

100 57A000 34.8 59 628 84.8000 

Average AD Wt (West, mg) Detail 


0 ArBtcial SoiVS 12.8333 36.8260 31.748 35.78 30.84 

100 23SW 10.352 29.91 25A520 34.7580 

Average AD Wt (Dry, mg) Detail 

Cone% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SONS 205668 1105200 526000 628333 5.17000 

100 4.14000 1.17200 4.69401 4.15001 5.57001 

Avenge Root WL (Wet, mg) Detail 

Cone-% Control Type Rep 1 Rap 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rap 5 

0 Artificial SONS 13.3167 452540 36.3420 48.99 42A88 

100 37.718 451401 39.542 28.564 48.6540 



0 ArOficiel SONS 0.64667 1.92800 1.52800 206331 1.92001 

100 1.57800 0.34401 1.84399 1AWW 282400 


Cana% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 3 

0 Artificial SONS 20.1500 82.0800 M0900 8277 73.328 

100 51165 14.8660 69.4520 54.978 83.6420 



0 Artificial SONS 270335 7.98000 8.78801 8.32666 7.09000 

100 5.71799 1.51602 8.53799 5.63999 8.39399 


Report Dab: 19 JUW6 924 AM 

TestUnk: 134I77654511B156804paC . 

000-092-101-1 CETIS" r v1.12W Analysh Ste- Approval: 

-107-


Comparisons: Pagel Of 9 


Analysis: 06.8058.60881D156603psC 

Plant Sloassay, • Chrordo CHZM Hill 

Endpoint 

Analysis 

Type Sample Link Control LMk Dab Analysed Version 

%GemJnaton Compar ison 1387785451 13.8776.5451 19JuW88:51AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOO- Task Un its ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance tTwo-SamplaC>T Angular (Co ) 100 >100 1 WA 20.96% 


Control vs Conn% Sta ti st ic 

Critical P-Value MSD Daolsion(0.05) 

Artficial SoWSed 100 -1.633 1.85955 0.9294 020917 Nor-SlgtiBanl EBeot 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareOF F StstWJo P-Value Decislon(0.05) 

Between 0.084348 0.084348 1 2.67 . 0.14111 Non-Slgniflant Effect 

Error 0.2530439 0.031630 8 

Total 0.33739194 0.1159785 9 

ANOVA Assumpt ons 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Val" Declalon(0.01) 

Varian" Modi fied Leven* 4.110000 11.25862 0.05984 Equal Varirfcs 

Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.81415 0.02153 Normal DlstrDiIDan 

Data Summary_ Original Dab Transformed Data 

Cone,% Control Type Count Mean MWmum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar ti ficial SOWS 5 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 021909 1.16160 0.88608 1.34528 025152 

100 5 1.00000 1XD%0 1.00000 0.00000 1.34528 1.34528 1.34528 0.00020 

Graphic 

i 

0. r 

0a a ' t 

^ as aas 

0. 

u 

at au 

ao 

e too .c -u -u es ao a u u • u 

000-092.101.1 . CETISm'v1.1.2revl Analyst: %P' Approval: 

41 

r 

r r 

r 

t 

108-



Report Dats: 19 JuM &51 AM 

Analysis: 13.1607-121618156604psC 

PWtd Bioassay - Chronic CH2M HI D 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control Link Data Analysed Version 

Average HeVd(mm) Compar ison 13-8778,5451 13-8778-5451 19Ju4088:51AM CETISvl.1.2 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zefa NOEL LOEL Toxic Un it 

s Chv PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwoSample C>T Untnuulanyd 11100 >100 1 WA 17.96% 


Control vs. Conn% Statlstle Critical P Value MSD Dedslon(0.05) 

Arti ficial SoelSedi 100 1.50034 1.85955 0.0860 13.6088 Non-Significant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source $ran of Squam Mean Square DF FStatistic PValus Decision(0.05) 

Between 301AD1 301.401 1 223 0.17192 Non-SiWw§wnlE ffect 

Error 1071.168 133.895 8 

Total 1372.56900 43529703 9 


Attribute Test' Statis tic Critical P-Value Deeision(0.01) 

Vadwws Variance Ratio F 2.36371 23.15450 0.42519 Equal Variances 

D4020on ShaptroWi k W 026837 0.87533 Normal Distribution 


Cone•% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 T5.750 61 54A 8.8228 

100 5 64.8 46 81 13.718 

Graphics 

t 

t 

r 

r 

^ 

r 

• 

t 'r 1 i 

t a 

s 

r 

r 

t r 

r 

r 

• 

r 

r 

o no yy .LS •ta ns ao os u 13 2a 

cam % aankits 

000-092-101-1 CETIS° v1.1.2revi Analysis e)"- Approval: 

z 

-109-



Report Dab: 19 JUWX 924 AM 

Analvsls: 11-2675.23088156604osC 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic am Him 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Cont rol Unk Data Analysed Version 

Average Length (mm) Compar ban 1387753451 13-07785451 19 Jul-08 9 .23 AM CETISvt.12 

Method Aft H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic UnitsCIN PMSD 

Equal Va riance t Two4 npb C> T Untransbtmsd


Comparisons:, Page 4 of 9 


Analysis: 02-4597.4713I8156W4psC 

Plant Bloisssy•Chronie CH2M NO 


Average AG Wt (Wet mg) Compa rison 13.87785451 13$778-5451 19 Ju4068:51 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform We 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C > T Untransbrmed 11100 >100 1 WA 37.50% 


Cont ro l vs ConcA/ Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Dadsionlo." 

Artificial sdUsedi 100 0.79139 1.86955 02258 11.1017 NonSWOkant Effect 

ANOVATable 

SourceSum of Squares Moan Square OF F Statis tic P-Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 55.80611 55.80611 1 0.83 0.45154 NonSlgnikent Effect 

Error 7128447 89.10558 8 

Total 768.850778 144.91169 9 


Attribute Test Statis tic Critical P-Value Declaton(0.01) 

Variances Variance RaUo F 1.12685 23.15450 0.91064 Equal Variances 

Distribu tion Shapiro-Wik W 0.84581 0.05178 . Normal Dis tribu tion 


Coma% Control Type Court Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 ArUfidal SdUS 5 29.605 12833 36.828 9.717 

100 5 24.881 10.352 34.758 9.1538 

Graphics 

t t ^ • 

g l 1 

1 • 

î 1 •' 

W. 

1 '1 

1 

1 

< 1 

1 

1 

• 1 

0 

0 100 •?d 

1 

1 

•13 •1a -0.f ea as 1.4 L1 34 

Cane% Rantdb 

000-092.1014 CETIS'R V1.12reA Analyst ^ Approval: 

^111^

M2 



Repo rt Date: 19 JuWG 11:51 AM 

Ana lysis: 155815-725518156W4psO 

Plant Bioassay - Chronic CH2M Hiq 

EndpoWt Analysis Type Sample L ink Control Link Date Analysed Version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Compa rison 13-8776-5451 135778.8451 19 Jut.W 8:51 AM CETISv152 

Method All N Data Transform Zeta NOEL LDEL Toxic Unks ChV PMSD 

Wicoxorl Rank Sum Two-Sample C)--T Rank 11100 >1DO 1 WA 39.71% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic C ritical P•Valw Ties Dacision(0. 

Artint9ai SoOISedl100 21 0.1111 0 NonSWOKant Effect 

ANOVATabie - 

Source Sum of Squares . Moan Square DF F Statistic P-Vaius Decision(o.D 

Between 2.548190 2.546196 1 0.91 0.38880 Nan-Slgnikent Effect 

Error 22A3875 2804843 a - 

TOW ' 242848429 5.3510389 9 

ANOVAAssumptiorts 

Attribute Test Stat istic Crit" P-Value Deciaion(O.01) 


Dl"uaon Shapiro-Witt W 0.78590 0.00977 Nonarormal D istribution 


Cone.% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 . 4.96040 2.05868 626333 1.69222 &80000 2.00000 10.00DO 3.1148 

100 5 3.95120 1.17200 557001 1.65713 420000 1.00000 8.00000 2.58844 

Graphics 

Lf 4.6 

^. 

gU 

g 

r • 

r 

r ^ 

r 

i 

r 

----------------------------- 

y(r 

0. 

r 

F 

s 

• 

r 

r 

r 

• 

r 

r 

Li . 

r 

r 

0 

COnO•% 

UO -LO -1S -c.0 4U Oa 0.4 to u 

-112- 

000492-101.1 CETIS"r v1.1.2nA Analyst ^'f AppmvaC__ 

aanYnf 

20 

NONE


Comparisons: page a of 9 


Anitysls: 04.10755129/5156604paC 

Plant Sloassay - Chronic CH21A HUI 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Link Control link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root WL (Wet ma) Comparison 13.87735451 13-07785451 19 JuWS &51 AM . t'3IEU".12 

Method AU H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CW PMSO 

Equal VarianoetTwo-Sample C>T• lktmnaformed 1100 MOO 1 .MA 48.66% 


Control vs Conr,% Sfetktle Critical PValue MSD Deetsion(0.0 

Artificial SoiVSed 1D0 0.62527 1.85955 0.2748 17.9113 Non-Slpnifiranl Effect 

ANOVA Table 

Source Srsn of Squares Maan Squaw 1)F F Statistic P Value Decision(0.08) 

Between 91.01494 91.01404 1 0.39 054921 NmSWFanl EUect 

Error 1861381 2327976 8 

Total 1953.39592 323.81258 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P-Val" Deelsion(0.01) 


DistnbuBOn Shapiro-Wilk W 0.86473 0.08873 Normal DlstrOwbon 


Conan/i Conbol Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 ArUF4W SoIVS 5 36.878 13.317 46.99 13.778 

100 5 30.844 45140 48.884 18.808 

Gmpbics 

1 

Q 1 

• i • 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

< 1 

1 

I 

0 

• 

• 1 1 

0 Ia .t,p -is -is -0S d0 0.f IA U U 

corgi aantlb 

—113- 

000-092.101.1 CETIS° V1.12revl Anayst 1 Approval:



Report Date: 19.144)8 8:51 AM 

Analysts: 05-9625.52M156&4psC 

Plant Bloassay • Chro nic CH2M Hill 

Endpoint AnafyslsType Semple Unk Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

Average Root W L (Dry. mg) Comparison 13-8778-5451 13417765451 19 Jui-06 &51 AM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform We NOEL LOEL Toxic Units CIN PMSD 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C > T Unhsnskmad 100 >100 1 • WA 54.49% 


Controlvs Cone•% Statistic Critical P-Value MSO Deeision(0:08) 

Arti6GalSdUSedl 100 0.01519 1.85956 0.4941 0.88128 Non.SgniflantEJfect 

ANOVASable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic PVakw Deelston(0.05) 

Between 0.0001296 0.00013 1 0.00 0.9a826 Nor-- g f am Effect 

Error 4.492009 0.561501 8 

Total 4.49213825 0.5616308 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Valve Declsion10.01) 


Disb t §M Shapiro•WBk W 0.93228 0.47069 Normal DlstrOu0on 


Cane•% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ad&bl SoiVS 5 1.61720 0.64667 2.08331 0.57819 

100 5 1.61000 0.34401 2.82400 0.88809 

Graphics 

LO 

to 

0A 

r 

t 

r 

r 

. r rr 

as ' 

U • 

QA 

0 100 40 -L! •la -U a0 as LO rs 28 

COW-% ameYns 

-114- 

0004192-101-1 CET1S°1 v1.12revl Anayst 15— Amixivak 

r 

r 

r


Comparisons: Page act 9 

Report Date: 19J"8:51 AM 

Analysts: 17.3037.788418156600psC 

Plant Bioassay-Chronic CH2M H01 

Endpoint Analys is Type Sampla Unk Control Unk Data Analysed Version 

Average Total Wt (Wet, mg) Compa rison 1347703451 13.8778-5451 19 Jul•08 &51 AM CETISv1.12 

Method A8 H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance I Two-Sample C>T Untranslorme0 11100 >100 1 . WA 43.459E 

Gro up Comparisons 

Con tr ol • vs Cone-% Sta ti s ti c Critical P-Value MSD Dadeion(0. 

Ar ti ficial SNIMUedl 100 0.6926 1.85955 02.541 2&8851 Non•SVW ant EIkU 

ANOVATabte 

SourceSum of Squares Maan Square OF F Stat isti c P-Value Declsion(0.05) 

Between 289.3573 289.3578 1 0.48 0.50818 NonS$FAant Effect 

Error 4825.742 603.2178 8 

Total 5115.09948 89257556 9 - 

ANOVAAssunptlona 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P•VakW Dedslon(0.01) 

Variances Va ri 

ance Rat io F 120888 23.15450 0.85859 Equal Va rtances 

Disbibu6an Shapiro -W ilk W 0.83756 0.04125 Normal Ditrbudon 


Cone-% Control Type Count Moan Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Ar tificial SoIVS 5 66.484 28. 15 8277 23.370 

100 5 55.725 14.866 83.642 25.695 

Graph ics 

_ r • 

t r 

t '• 

r 

11 ' 

r i ' 

g 

r^ 

c 

C 

^ 

r 

s i 

r 

0 

0 

coed% 

ife •2-0 •La •1e- 4S 04 OS ! 4 14 

000.092-101-1 CETIS"'v1.12ev1 Meys^^ Approvak 

r 

Renklla 

3A 

—115-



Repo rt Date: 19 Ju408 8:51 AM 

Anatysts: 00.324"620113156604paC 

Plant Bloassay - Chronic CH21A Hill 


Average To tal Wt (Dry, mg) Compar ison 1387785451 13$7785451 19 Ju{-06 8:51 AM CETISr1.12 

Method At H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Unto CAV PMSO 

Equal Variance It C>T untransbrmed 100 >100 1 WA 42.7496 


Control vs Conr:% Statistic Critical PValus MSD Dec(sloo(0.05) 

Ar tificial SOWSed 100 0.67228 1 45955 02802 2.81142 NankSipNBcant Effect 

ANOVATabie 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareOF F Statistic lo Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 238272 2.58272 1 OAS 0.52034 No"WiicanlEffect 

Error 45.71575 5.714468 B 

Total 482984881 82971885 9 


Attribute Test Statis tic Critical P Value Declsion(0.01) 

Vadamcee Variance Retie F 124729 23.15450 0.83501 Equal Va riances 

Distribu tion Shapiro4M W 0.83879 0.04267 Normal DIstrlbu tlon 


Cona9'. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Ar tificial SOWS S 6.57761 2.70335 8.32668 225514 

100 5 538120 1.51602 8.39399 2.51859 

Graphi cs 

1.0 r 

a4 

t r' 

V r 

r 

0.I 'l • • i 

OA 

r e 

r 

r 

0 100 d.0 -If •1a 43 0.0 e.a 1A 1.f to 

Coro-% aaexb 

000.092.101-1 CETIS" v1.12revl Analyst: ^S"' Approval: 

r 

-116-

BLLMGRASS GROWTH TM 

lL 

a../ wwJYq..t2wwN.M/qqTwO D.sys' 06 

o4"07, D" ll —s_, ' one[ N oav 0 D" *jLf— oMn-am own ars'b_ana 0 B" 

Tory. h..lwwl.•q ttl.pw.bww/.^Y/N(.wp Mwe M/YY.Iww4Ny 

R.pâw• .^^5 

. pwrp.ro S L.. U 

Rypwbo ^ 

w.ISI ^ ^'slz^_L•.... 

Mr...w. o./t coop 101• N•p /+..rw^Ye.ti /ie.. Pl •Iw^.b ^.t 

uaM wre^...r o^m..rrr.rr.w 

.tpw.w/ 

1Ypftm l 

Rypull C 

mp..ro 

MIr+• l 

r^0rwpt 

rpwwr..gwew Nro 

I.p•.•wM 

W..wA W.qt 

Twn ofr..tpp 

01.•VMA 

cowc IRRXA7/ d .tlpi 

w+o w*o 

co.aa 

Do"*".C•.wwwi 

N ".64 

Rwd / 

A. dp c 

R.p.w0 

t.Iawl 

Ww.. RaalWi/wl 

YJW/1•pOMMb.pMwpl 

Iswwd r.mq 

Y•.we%dwavm 

ip.11M.M V 4r pewMpwpM/I^ 

C..Wp 

lI/ Q No' . 

/ "oft gwtwww W 

&mnw p0 

..1" I.r 

w•w/ p.tq 

7 QQMOoYf PM. 

/wr .N l.ld[..M••w 

w+n w+v 

6 ' ^J 

• SAY 

w I 

3 

J 

r 

Iy•/Mre.w.w O.M.IN •w•Ì•• W./Mww.b+ww.^rip.,pw.e.w4.M.I.w.pp.M Ow..q 

I 09RM UÎ:^f0IMM 

i^_ n[l31d1^®alplLai^^ 

MOM y^ 

^s^-mommmrmsn"== 

.' 1M TI KV^G^LII7L7 

"M_MMUMOMERM 7 ^L^/ 

T!M^ : ESTSMEMR:7 

N vs Key. 

f •M w.w /It11pL 

►o3N. too 

a+.•w. iew 

"Wom"


Page 101 3 

Report Date: 19 Jul-W 925 AM 

Teat unk: 08.733950201B15W05psC 

PIarBBioaasay • Chronlc CH2MH91 

Test No: 03-=7-9738 Teat type: Plant Chmla Duration: WA 

Sta rt Date: 05 Apr-06 Protocol: ASTM E19SU2 (2002) Specks: Poe sarxtherg8 

Ending Dat r. DU Water. Source: 

Setup "r. D5 Apr-00 adnr. 


Sample No: 14-US9.5117 Code: B1566-05 Client: 

Sample Date: 04 Apr-08 Material: Sca Project: 

Receive Daft: Source: Hanford 

Sample Age: 24h Station: 

Commenta: J11JH4 


Analysis Endpolnt NOEL LOEL Chv PMSD Method 

05.9958.09% % Germination 100 >100 WA 27.93% Wilooxon Ra * Sum Two-Semple 

094863.9500 Average Height (mm) 4100 100 WA 11.17% Equal Var iance I TWoSampk 

13-2897.9281 Average Leng th (mm) 100 >100 WA 25.19% Equal Var iance t Tw o-Sampb 

12-7179-0270 Average AG Wt (Wet, mil) 100 > 100 WA 32.37% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

04.1030.1329 Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) 100 >100 WA 33.30% Equal Variance t Two-Sample 

045048.9747 Average Root WL (Wet, mg 100 > 100 WA 36.45% Equal Variance t TvaSanple 

08-4825-7799 Average Root WL (Dry, mg) 100 > 100 . WA 35.66% Equal Variance ITwoSample 

04.02255494 Average Total Wt (We%mil' 100 > 100 WA 34.13% . Equal Var ia nce lTwoSampk 

05-2803-0914 Average Total Wt (Dry, mill 100 > 100 NIA . 33.47% Equal Var ia nce t Two-Sampk 

0004)92-101.1 CETISè v1.1.2W Analyst: ^ Approval: 

^118—



Cone-% Control Type Raps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 

0' Artificial SOWS S . 0.84000 0.60000 1.00000 0.09798 021909 28.08% 

100 5 0.92000 0.60000 140000 0.08000 0.17889 19A4% 


Cone-*/ Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE • SD CV 

0 Artificial SONS 5 75.780 61 84AOO 3.9903 &9226 11.77% 

106 5 64.66 61.200 732 2.1913 4.8988 7.58% 


Cone-'A Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 91.22 50 117.40 11.4 25.491 27.94% 

100 5 72.72 54 79.6 4.7702 10.666 14.67% 

Average.AG Wt (Wet, mg) Summary 


Report Date: 19 Jui•06 925 AM 

Ted UNc 08.7339.5070I8156605psC 

Cone.% Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV - 


100 5 23.145 14.014 29.797 2.7717 6.1977 26.78% 


Cone'/ Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD Cv 


100 5 3.76653 2.32200 4.98667 OASS35 1.04058 27.63% 

Average Root WL (Wat, m9) Summary 

Cone-'A Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SoM 5 36.878 13.317 48.99 6.1615 13.778 37.38% 

100 S 31.738 20.338 41.842 3.7804 8.4532 28.63% 


Cone SG Control Type Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD CV 


100 5 1.65493 1.05601 2.03398 0.17121 0.38285 23.13% 


Conc-Y. Control Type Reps Mean MlMmum Maximum BE SD Cv 

0 ArbftWSoWS 5 66.484 28.150 82.77 t0A52 23.370 35.15% 

100 5 54.883 34.352 6&818 62951 14.078 25.65% 

Average Total Wt (Dry, mg) Summary . 

Cone-Y. Control Reps Mean Minimum Maximum BE SD Cv 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 657761 2.70335 8.32656 1.00653 225514 342M 

100 5 SA2147 3.37800 8.75334 0.62011 1.38680 25.58% 

000.092-1014 CETIS° vl.1.2reW Analyst 8- Approval: 

-119-




0 Artificial SoWS 0.80000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 1.00000 

100 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.60000 


Conc'A Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SONS 61 84A000 75.6000 80.7 T7 

100 612000 642 62 732 617000 


Conch!. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 8 


100 54 76.8 74.4000 79.6 79 


Report Dab: 19 Jul-088:25 AM 

Test Unk: 06-73W50201815%05ysC 

Avenge AG Wt .(Wet, mg) Detail 


0 Artd"SoWS 12.8333 36.8260 31.748 35.78 30.84 

100 14.0140 24.974 ' 20.118 26.822 29.7907 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Deta9 

Cone-Y. Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 R.T 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 •• 

0 Artificial SOIVS 2.05888 6.05200 526000 626333 5.17000 

100 2.32200 3.90800 3.19401 4.44199 4.96687 

Average Root VOL (Wet, Mill Detail 

Cone-% Control Type Rapt Rep 2 Rep 3 Rap 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial SOWS 13.3167 452540 36.3420 45.99 42.486 

100 20.3380 41.8420 '28.3220 34.114 36.0733 

Avenge Root WL (Dry, mg) Detail 



100 1.05601 1.87601 1.52201 2.03398 1.78666 


Corr% Control Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 Artificial $OWS 2&1500 82.1)800 6&0900 82.77 73.328 

100 34.352 66.816 4&4400 60.938 85.87 


Cone.% ComrOl Type Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Rep 4 Rep 5 

0 AMkW SOWS 2.70335 7.98000 &78801 8.32668 7.09000 

100 3.37800 &78400 4.71603 6.47598 &75334 

000-092-101.1 CE sw v1.12" Anelps JS- Approval: 

-120-



Report Date. 19 J" 8:56 AM 

Analysis: 05.9958-099918156605psC 

Fnard Bioassay- Chronlo C 112M Hi ll 

Endpoint Analysts Type Sample Unk Control Unk Date Analyzed Version 

%Gem imlicn Comparison 08-7339.5020 08-73395020 19 Jul-06 &55AM CETISV1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta NOEL LOEL Twde ll nits ChV PMSD 

Wilooxon Rank Sum Two-Sample C> T Rank 100 >700 1 WA 2793% 


Co ntrol vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Value Tin Decislon(0.0 

Ar tificial SoWSedi 100 30 0.5548 3 ant Effect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Squa re 

DIP F $tatistic ' P Vakto DedWon(0.0 

Between 0.021087 0.021087 1 0.40 0.54474 No"IgnificantEOect 

Error 0.4217399 0.052717 8 - 

Total 0.44202593 0.0738045 9 

ANOVAAssump tions 

Attribute Test Statistic Cri tical P-Value Dewsion(0.01 


DisMution Shapiro-Wik W . 0.75854 0.00455 N004)ormal Distribution 


Con o-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean M inimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SOWS 5 0.54000 0.80000 140000 021909 5.0DD00 2.00000 7.00000 2.73581 

100 5 092000 0.50000 1.00000 0.17889 8.00000 2.00000 7.000110 223807 

G raphic 

a i 

1 

• •^• 

0. 

1 

y.............. 1 -------------- 

....... ............... • Wes MU-Y ^ 1 

1 

a 1 ' 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• • 1 

ai 1 

OA 

0 104 -1.a -1.s -1A -is 

1 

0.e eS Le u Lo 

cwt % Rani ft 

oDD*92-101.1 CET1Sw Vt.12 A Analyst; 3- Apixoral: 

1 

I 

-121



Report Date: 19 JUI-06 8:58 AM 

Analysis: 09.48659500y8158805osC 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH2M Hill 

. Endpoint Analysis Type SamploLlnk ConttolLink Date Analyud Version 

Average HeigM (mm) Comparison 08.7338.5020 08.73393020 19 Jut-06 8:55 AM CETISv1.12 

Method ANN Data Transform Zeta NOEL. LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Va riance t Two-Sample C> T LhMransbrmed e100 100 NIA 11.17% 


Control va Cans%% Statistic Crit ic al P-Value MSD Dedsion(0.O5) 

Artificial SoWSerp100 2.44269 1.85955 0A2O2 8.46534 SigrYBcent Effect 

ANOVATable 

Souris Sum of Squa res Mean Square OF F StatisticP-Value Dedsion(0.0S) 

Between 30&1361 309.1361 1 5.97 0.04039 SlgniBca nt Effect 

Error 414.4799 51.80999 8 

Total 723.618028 380.94807 9 

ANOVAAssumptixm 

Attd6ut• Teat Statistic criti ca l P•Vslue Dedslon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 3.31606 23.15450 027234 Equal Varlences 

DisbUtlon Shapiro-Wilk w 0.90869 027211 Normal Distribut ion 

Data Summary Original Data Transformod Data 

Cono-% Control Type Count ' Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SoM S 75780 61 84.4 &9228 

100 5 64.66 612 T32 4.8998 

G raphics 

r 

^ t 

^ 

$ r 

1 . r 

• r 

r 

< r rr 

l 

r 

_____________ 

•1 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

o .0 r 

• • 200 .2.4 •ld -1A -43 40 03 la I.S 1 0 

Cann% aaoMb 

00D-092-101-1 CETIS= %1.1.2evl Analyst 3+ Approvak 

-122-

CET{S Analysis Detail 


Report Date: 19 Jut-08 925 AM 

Analysis: 13-2897.9281IB750605psC 

Plant Bioassay=Chronic CH2M Nil 

Endpoint Ana lysis Type Sample Link Control Unk Date Analysed version 

Average length (mm) Compa rison 08.7339.5020 08-73395020 19 Jul-08 925 AM CET svm2 

Method Alt H Data Transform 2ata 711 NOEL LOF.L Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Va ri ancetTwoSam ple C>T Unlransfomned 11100 >100 1 WA 25.19% 


Control vs Cores-% Sta ti sticCritical P-Value MSD Deeision(0.0 

ArtificialSclllSedi 100 1A9706 1.85955 O4880 229794 NonSgnlBwntEBect 

ANOVATable 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P Value Deelsion(0.05) 

Between 855.628 855.625 1 224 0.17275 NanSlgN fi cent E ffect 

Error 30SC178 381.772 6 

Total 3909.80103 1237.3970 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical PVetue Decislon(0.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 5.71118 23.15450 0.11998 Equal Va riances 

Dtambudon Shapiro-Willi W 0.88471 0.14774 Normal Dis tribution 

Data Summary Original Data T ra nsformed Date 

Cone',. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SO Mean • Minimum Maximum SO 

0 Artificial SdyS 5 9122 50 117A 25.491 

100 5 7272 ` 54 799 10.868 

G raphics 

9 

1W 30 

E i • 

i • 

,t 

i 

^ 

• 

•'• r 

< i 

at 

a toe 

Cora % 

r 

•re 43 -IA 45 ea 0.S td t3 

000-092-101.1 CETISm v1.1.2rrA AnalysC_,T^ Approval: 

' 

r 

aaradts 

to 

-123-


Plant Bioassay-Chronic 



Analysis: 12-7179A270/3156605pSC 

Endpoint Analysis Type Semple Unk Control Link Data Analyzed Version 

Average AGWt(Wet, in)Comparison 08.73393020 08-73393020 19JU-058MAM CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transform Zeta I NOEL LOEL Tome Units ChV PMSD 

Equal VariancetTwoSample CaT Untransfomxid 11100 x100 1 WA 32.37% 


Control vs Conc-% Statistic Critical P Vaiw MSD Dedsion(0.05) 

Artificial SoWSed 100 1,25344 1.85955 0.1227 9.58459 NonSlgrdncanl Effect 

AHOVATable 

Source Sun of Squares Mean Square DF f statistic P-Vales Oedsion(0.05) 

Between 104.3463 104.3463 1 1.57 024544 Non Vgnifiant Effect 

Error 531.3278 88.41598 8 

Total 835.674072 170.76223 9 


Attribute Test Statistic critical P-Valus Dedsl=40.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.45800 23.15450 0.40501 Equal Vadences 

013bftdon Shapiro-Writ W 0.84922 0.05688 Normal Distribution 


Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minknurn Ma dmurn SD Mean Minirnourrl Maximum SD 

0 'Artificial SOWS S 29.605 12.833 36.828 9.717 

100 5 23.145 14.014 29.797 6.1977 

Graphics 

1 1 / 

a 1 

6 

1 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• 

1 

• •i• 

3 1 1 

• 1 

1 

0 

0 

cone- 

. 


•1 

• 

1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

•1e- -45 44 -0.S W 0.r 1.0 IA 

aanH4 

CH2M Hill 

-124- 

000-092-101-1 CETIS11 0.12MA Analyst:_; Approral;__ 

1.e-




Analysis: 04-1030.1329JB1566D5psC 

Plant Sloassay-Chronic CH2MHill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unk Date Analyzed version 

Average AG Wt (Dry, mg) Comparison 08-73395020 08.73395020 19 Jul-06 8:56 AM CETiSv1.12 

Method At H Data Transform Zeb NOEL. LOq. Toxic Units CW PMSD 

Equal Variance tTwo-Sample C>T Unbartslormed 11100 stoo 1 WA 3330% 


Control vs Cone-Y. Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dscblon(0.05) 

Artificial So9/Sedi 100. 1.34382 1.85955 0.1079 1.65205 Non-SigNficant Effect 

ANOVATxble 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statistic PValue Dscislon(0.05) 


Error 15.78555 1973194 8 

Total 19.3488472 5.5364908 9 


Attribute Test Statistic Critical PValue Declslon(0.01) 


DbMbutlon Shapko-WUk W 0.87162 0.10441 Normal Dlatnbuticn 

Data Summary • Original Data Transformed Deb 

Cone-Y. Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artificial SO$ 5 4.96040 2.05868 626333 1.89222 

100 5 3.76653 2.32200 4.96667 1.04056 

Graphic 

Lo 

s at 

4s 

•'• 

e 

CA i 

, 

at 

r 

; 

• r 

U 

0 

too d.a -is -1.0 4! 0.e 0.S 10 t.i 

t00Pla 

—125- 

000-092-1014 CETISr• v1.12reA Analyst;_ Q^- Appmnt;__ 

r 

r 

r 

r 

RddJb 

• 

to



Report Data: 19 Jul-08 &58 AM 

Analysis: 04-5048-97478156805psC 

Plant B(oasaisy- Chronk CH2M Hill 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Llnk Control Llnk Date Analysed Vereion 

Average Root WL (Wet, m9) Comps 0&7339.5020 08.73395020 19 JuW6 &56 AM , CETISv1.12 

Method Alt H Data Transtonm Zola 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSO 

Equal Variance t Two-Sample C> T Unignsfomied 11100 >100 1 WA 3&45% 

Group Compar is ons 

Control vs Cone-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Dedsion(0.05) 

AttiBclal SoWSedl 100 0.71108 1.85955 02488 13.4424 Non--4gn0lant Elled 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares Mean SquareDF F Statistic P-Value Decialon(0.05) 

Between O&IM97 66.05597 1 0.51 0.49724 Nan3lgd8carit Effect 

E rr or 1045.13 130.6412 8 

TOW 1111.18549 196.69710 9 

/NOVA Assumptions 

Attribute Test Statis tic Critical P-ValUO Dxision(O.Ot) 

Variation Va ri ance Ra tio F 2.65655 23.15450 036694 Equal Vatiances 

Dist rIbution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.87165 0.10448 Normal Dis tribu ti on 

Data Summa ry 

Original Data Transformed Data 

Cone-% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maxknum 30 

0 Arbfdal SOWS 3 38.878 13.317 46.99 13.778 

100 5 31.738 20.338 41.842 8.4532 

Graphics 

g 1 

1 1 

r e 

E I 

1• 

1 •i 

1 • 1 

• 

I 

1 

1 

1 

e 

-^ I 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 • 

4 100 4O -u -Lb -03 Oa as 1e- IS 20 

c. % Rankas 

000-092-101.1 CETIS° v1.12Mvl Analyst 8—Appnovd: 

1 

-126-


Compariso ns: Pap Tor 9 

Report Data: 19 Jul-06 8:58 AM 

Analysis: 08-4 82S-7799/8156605p3C 

Plant Bloassay- Chronic CH2M HUI 

Endpoint Anatyais Type • Semple Lhrk Control Link Data Analyzed Version 

Average Root WL (Dry. mg) Comparison 08-73395020 08.73395020 19 Jut-06 8:58 AM CE nSvl.1.2 

Method Alt H DataTmnsform Zeta NOEL LOEL Toxic Un its ChV PMSD 

Equal Vadance t Two-Sample C>T 1Mbanstomrsd 100 >100 1 WA 35.68% 


Control vs Conc-% Statis ti c Cri ti cal P-Valve MSD Decision(0.05) 

AraOdal Sol IfSedl 100 -0.12171.115955 OS469 0.57668 Non-Significant Vied 

ANOVA Table 

Source Sum of Squares - Mean SquarbOF F Statistic P Vatus Daeiston(C.05) 

Between 0.0035600 DDM560 1 0.01 0.90815 Non-StgtlOnnt Effect 

Error 1.923489 C 240436 8 

Total 1.92704911 02439981 9 


Attribute Test Statietlo critical P-Val ue Decislon(0.01) 


Dishibubn Shapiro-Wilk W 0.85352 0.06397 Normal Distriou tion 


Cores% Control Type Count Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Minimum Maximum SD 

0 Artibdal SOWS 5 1.51720 0.64667 2.06331 0.57819 

1DO S 1.85493 1.05601 211,1398 0138285 

Graphics 

^ 

r 

8 

LIP 

W 

d 

______ 

--------------- 

a 

r 

1 

r • • 

r 

r • • r 

0. 0 '-'--- °__ 

• • 

_ r 

______________ 

r 

as r 

r 

. 

4! i r 

04 

a 

r 

r 

• r . 

0 100 -10 -is -a 4s as 0! u u 0.0 

Cant_% Nnxha 

000-M-101-1 CETISnr V1.12rovi Analyst g Approval- 

i 

-127-


Comparison: . pap Bof 9 

Repor) Dote: 19 JU403 3:58 AM 

Analysis 04.=8849413156605psC 

PHnt Btosssay-Ch rome CH2M Hill 

Endpoint AnayslsType Sample Link Control Link Date Analyzed Version 

AvsrageTotWWt (Wet mg) Corr"rison 05-73395020 WT3393020 19JU1-083:58AM CETISv1.12 

Method AK H Data Transform, Zeta 11 NOEL LOEL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Varienos 11 TNOSampie C>T Untransformed 11100 >100 1 WA 34.13% 


Controlvs Con e.% Statistic Critkal P-Value MSO Dsddon(0.05) 

Artificial SOWSed 100 0.95081 1.85953 0.1843 226883 NWK9igr fIcant Eflaat 

ANOVAT" 

SourceSum of Squares Mean Square OF F Statistic P•Value Dedsion(0.05) 

Between 33&4471 336A471 1 0.90 0-361)54 Non-Significa nt Efed 

Ens 2977274 372.1593 3 

Total 3313.72122 708.60632 9 

ANOVA Assumpt ions 

Attribute Test Statistic Critical P Valve Dodslontc.01) 

Variances Variance Ratio F 2.75655 2115450 0.34972 - Equal Varanoes 

Disfrlbulon Shapko-WilkW 0.837D0, 0.04061 NomW Distdbulion 

Daft Summary Original Daft Transformed data 

Cone.% Control Type Coed Mean Minimum Maximum SD Mean Mkrknum Maximum SO 

0 Ar ti ficial SOWS 5 63.484 2&15 3277 23.370 

100 5 54.883 34.352 66.818 14.070 

Graphics 

t a 

t r 

•^• 

t7 t 

.;. t a ------ ----P - ------------ -- 

i 

t • ' r 

0 

o 

COM-% 

• 

• i 

r 

r 

no .xo •ts .tt au of as id u 

COD-092-101-1 CETISTM v1.12rev1 Analyst 6+ Approval: 

r 

1 

sankks 

u 

—128-


Comparisons: Pape 9 o 9 


Analysts: • M2803.09148158805psC 

Plagl Bioassay- Ch ronic CH2 111 HIO 

Endpoint Analysis Type Sample Unk Control Unk Data Analysed Version 

Aver4e Total Wt (Dry, m9) Compar is on 08-73395020 08-733950¢0 19 JW-06 &.56 AM CETISv1.1.2 

Method Pit H Data Transform Zeta 11 NOEL LOF IL Toxic Units ChV PMSD 

Equal Variance It C>T Unftnskxmed 11100 >100 1 WA 33A7% 


Control vs Cane-% Statistic Critical P Value MSD Deobion(O.M 

Artificial Sol l/Se dl100 0.97!153 1.85955 0.1787 220155 Non-SfpnAcant Effect 

ANOVATabN 

Source Sum of Squares Mean Square DF F Statis ti 

c P Value Decision(0.05) 

Between 3.341638 3.341636 1 095 0.35740 Non-Significant Effect 

E rror 28A3329 3.5041 61 6 

Total 31.3749232 &8457971 9 


Attribute 

Variances 

Test 

Va riance Ra 

Statistic Criliral P-Value Daelston(0.01) 

ti 

o F 2.64510 23.15450 0.36899 Equal Var iances 

Distribution Shapiro-Wilk W 0.85862 0.07350 Normal Dlaftution 


Conc-% Control Type Court Mean Minimum Maximm SD Mean Minkm m Maximum So 

0 Ar tificial SOWS 5 6.57761 270335 822668 225514 

100 5 5A2147 3.37800 6.75334 1.38660 

Graphics 

II a 

LO 

L7 

• 1 

F 1 

1 

0.I 1 

1 

0 

Ce00•ri 

OA 

• 

1 • 

i . • / 

1 

1 

•^• 

• 

100 -Le -Li -t.0 -0J to 0.0 1.0 IS 

-129- 

000-092-101.1 CETISw %1.12 A Ana lyst 81. AppmvaIL_ 

1 

1 

1 

aasklls 

1A

C 27a'/et' 

!-'Washington Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST ' RC-051-3 1 1ase I or 1 

ector 

COLLOM 

ComuanrContact 

JOANKESSNER 

TeleoboneN o, 

3T54US 

Proiect Coordinator 

KESSNER.JH PdaCode SL 

Proieet Daieaotion 

100& 300 A rea Compont en orlhe RCBRA-Inca. otal So 

SamoIIna Loud" 

600-131 

SAF Na 

RC-031 

Air Quality ;. 

Ice Chest Na Field Lo gbook N o. COA Method orShioment 

Et.IS96 8ESRAS6520 

DataTurnarouod 

45 Days 

Shinned To O(Giu ProOCrh' Na Bill of Lad(na/Air Bi ll Na 

C_HWHILL _ _ __ A060151 

POSSIIII.E SAMPLE 11AZARDS/REMARIGS . • • _ •_ _ • _-• •-. _ _ ..-._ _ r. _ _ - _ • _.• -• • _ . _ 

NONE 

Preservation 

11s.. aa.e 

Special handling and/or Storage 


NONE No of Cootalaer(s) t t ' 

• Volume 

a0o0i 

1 It $1 

(r-1- 05 CX- 

so 1..(1)in aN rt•a 

as•w T.a;o• 

SAMPLE ANALYSIS ` Sol , a.ttaae 

Ted.ar 

AfTMa21n 

• Sample amp Matrix SamD Sample Samp kTima .. < y• ..,. •:. jo 1" 

-' 'Z, 1 ."- ^. °:;'C••' '. i:.: i J' ;^,;:" Y. ;. w 

'^ '^. 

•Hoare• TODwil SOIL !a- I -OS 1530 X 

jio&4M+ SOIL 

1WBWt SOIL 

-mom SOIL . 

JtO5w& SOIL 

CKAIN 

PO FSS N Si n/PriatNames SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS0tS 

w^r 

B t" 11) Pucka:a(D1rSê ) -DQl: Mako Contort• D2 D2216; TOC•90aoc9N (Sam. (Sam.0: 

ffy^rngrd 

mm Deterrarc RatJ.sd V Datd(ima 

lteiequlslod ByRenoved From Datarrm a Reftiveii armored b DatdMu 

Ioqukhed D)AteamdFmm 

mlorrime . 

Received ByiSWW InDawriar 

tixluW"Bp1tcnored From DeW(km Received BySwcd SoDau/rilve 

DyRaatad Frota Datelror Byawd INDawrime 

1 

Matrix. 

s.o.t.^ 

aa. 

^,• sw 

RrOw Vern 

••ra.' 

an•K. 

t+w 

' Mrep♦I^ 

+^ 

LABORATORY ReedwdBr T1Je D'1O`rlme 

SECTION 

F1 AL SAMPLE DVosd Mc%hW Dkposed B y, ne wr ^ 

POSITION 

01tE-011 (08!28!2005)

21 Ill 8ot 

^Vasldnitton Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS RE UEST RC-051-4 P&de. 1 or 1 

tot Comosayconted Teleoboae No. Proiet Coordlnator 

COLLOM JOAN KESSNER 3754638 KESSNER• JH Price Code $L Data Turnaround 

Pro tect Desiana tion Semo lina Loca tion SAFNo. Alr Quality 1 , 45 Days 

100 & 300 Arc& Conwmnl of do RCBRA • inemmmtal'So P rT 23 80051 a 

' 

Ice Chest tea 

• 

Field Loahook Na 

EI. 1 596 BRAS6320 

OA Method *[Shipment 

CES 

Shinned To Ofwle Properly Na Bi ll 

CH2MHILL A060131 

of Lad[WAlr Bill Na 

POSSIBLC SAMPLE ffABARDS/REMARK3 ' 

NONE 

Preterva tion 

t+ew New 

Special Hiadliae and/or Storage 

NONE 

• 



No. of Container(:) 

Vahsme 

G? 

t 


See kae(0k 

NO 

1 

' 

jam_ 

S'el sky 

twos. 

SeMR WR106k 

STM ay 

AaiM idlA 

Sampb Na Matrix • Sampb Date Sar,tpk Tune - , v , 4Y•' 

,' "'°^.r.°` F;t:.^ ^/,'eE •"' -. ^*^' 

J10DV4 SOIL' 11 •-Q

1 

£L.21,3/ 

WaSNinQton Closure Hanford CHAIN QVCUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051-9 Pape 1 or i 

(lector 

1-COLI,OM 

CammtnT Cantaet 

JOAN KESSNL•'R 

Telmlionc No. 

3751688 

Proiecl Coordioator 

KESSNCR, III PriceCadc SL 

sled Uesiematlan 

100 & 100 Anro Clmynrn:nl of IAc RCRRA • Incrcl Mtal Sa 

Samntiaa Loca tion 

Uvbnd BxlttUi Eknied-100 -r-2 

SAF\a 

RC-03 I 

Air Quality 

Ckul No. }iced Loebook No. COA Aletllod ofSb(nmeol 

EL-IS96 SESRAS6520 

Inocd To Offsite PfoacrIV No. Bin or LadinE/Air Uill No. 

CH2Mtllli. A060151 

OSSIBI.F, SAMPI.F, IIA7.AItIAV/ItKMARI:'i 

b/ealia/lp Aadian"AT. 

.p ecial Handling and/or Storage 

rONE 

Prescrn tioo 


No.of Contalocr(s) 

Yoiome 

R•Y ^pef 

alp PA2 

1 1 

1000E 

^t 

Dua TTurnaround 

round 

45 Days 

is YaatnY WlNra 

mdi Twk?r 

Ireuiebat AEM 614&k 

SAMPLE ANALYSIS Sol N."W& 

TeaNr 

- ASTM Eyln • 

Sample NM Matrix • Sample Date Sample Tim '. •,.^'.(^• .:.,nsq.'.. ^•-.da- • _^' ^^ :r=Y!^^' 

IODTB SOIL I I OS / e 7I. 

• 

CHAIN OF PO.C.SMMON 

d IIP'RenwTd DaWfr ae ip R 

t wrrinr Namea 

B 1 W 

SPECIA L U 45TRUCTIONS 

PouckSiae (Dry Sine) • DUL. NPU6re Cornea!-D221&TOC-9060: PH adill-9045: 

Matrix • 

ew 

td-s.a.s 

1 

W 

a,b,1. 7 

aro8to br KjclMN • 7f1.2i Anosria•)f0.S:KAnioq -7940: Prraal Sofdr 

so.t.W 

iue ,,/ 

1 q ry., 

3L— h^Q l P^^xp 

vf 

EnquokM ny+Reanrd Wan Darerrne Rererrad BPZWmd la Datdrin•e 

6a9rdslnl DycReWaed Won QgJr rw Rmeired BrStored M Daw7 ne 

B/5Ya-o3 

• 

W.1ra 

o .."o 

ra-m.a Urrn 

r-r« 

•r-fN 

411 

Eayaiskil Sy+Remoeed Paen ISdKfinr Re e M BrSnaed to 

ottvTww 

Eoyubned o)+RM"VA Pawn OxwOaa) aaet.Td oP4tad to Do1a rhne 

AnOMTORY 

SFF'I'I AN 

aaN al Ilr 

IY S^t^^ PLE 

X7 ,. 

t)bgaaal MehY 

b-EE-0 7 (08/29!2005) 

Tkk 

DbPPreed Oy 

roWrr'•rc 

ryndrioW 

x w

L• A 1y r. 

) 

7 E ?- ,a 

VI'1lshin¢toll Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051-20 F+xe t t 

olledof 

L.0 LLOM 

ComoapTConact 

JOAN KESSNER 

Teleohone No. 

315.4699 

Protest Coordinator 

KESSNER,JN PrizeCale Da DaTurnaround 

Turnaround 

Proieel Deafaaation SamounaLoeauon SAFNo. 

100 d 300 Arco Con"cru orthe RCBRA - In mealal So R (porian Low-Sikal0 Dow dvcr 100•D RC-051 . 

Ice Chest No. Field Loe400k No. CO:L Method ofShipmeat 

EL-IS96 SESRA56520 

Shinned To Olffite Proocrty No. Bi ll of Ladlur/Air Di ll CH2MI IIIJ. 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE HAZARDSIRF.MARKS 

A06015) 

No. 

NONE 

Preserva tion N0" 

Wee 

Spctial Handling antVorStoraRe 

NONE 


No.ofGutalnegi) 

GIP 

I 

PIG 

I 

• Volume 

IOOOf 4000f 


IN z 

fet/w,(IlY sd Pb, 

fruit 

acuroka 

Temrar 

ASTM (lark 

faa Mrrtedr 

ry Tm"y 

SL 

Air Quality •, 

' 

45 Days 

Samek No. Mavis• Samp kDate Sample nro .g;•.:.y-;. 

>s Ja':S

Washington Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC•051.69 1 phF 1 w 1 

Collector ComoanT Contact Teleohoue No, Prolecl Coordinator 

SI'ANKOVICI,. M. JOAN KPSSNER 37S-4688 K6SSNER•JH Price Code 8L• Dau Turnaround 

roiect Desieoadmi Samoliva Loca tion SAF N0. 

100 & 300 Am Comiwtlrnt of the RCDRA • Incremental So 100-X RIPARIAN eS RCO5I 

Ice Cheat No. Field Loebook No. COA Metlwd of SWoment 

EL.1596 BESRAS6520 GROUNOTRANSPORT 

Swoned To 

CH2MHIU_ 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE LIAZARD IUMARKS 

Offsito Prowty No. 

A066M"aC li&-o6 0603 ?o 

NONE I,r,a to ft" 

Special IIaadiing and/or Storage 

Urepose3/orafisirwluwnrialto CurvalIL;fw M/Spmpardttatatd 

Type ofContalucr 

No.of Cmltalner(t) 

GIP 

1 

ING 

1 

ali4minr• page 1jmradiomwlwAra1froaio4r to Ebdrline• A pare 2 

forrhemko/ onalytiraljraair to LJaaf/le. Vobune 

[ODDS 4000a 

Sw aaa nib SwrM 

SP-M TWUT 

SAMPLE ANALYSIS wâw.w 

Tw:Ry 

Aara9 ysn: 

Sample No. Matrix• Sample Date Samp le Tune 

J71Jf38 SOIL C. 

.4•. 

3' 

BID of Ladino/Alr IIm No. 

Air Quality p 

CHAIN OF POSSFSSiON 

NpahMd By/Ranw.ed from 

t z «. 

n`+ n'AyCda f7 ^TO1A 

lywaRhm 

T• i Po a 

^'"'^?Z ` 

S4w7rin1 Names 

• 

ties U i ( 

Da3rMr 

3,11 

SPECIAL. INSTRUCnONS 

- Ttru WARS idicue cot wku 6"d Dal. uubin w of Iww" Wid1 Seu6u:.to9o — Tow gr 

Raalysk 4acLim 

^Tlrw mks "cut dA d:e'r a non4aalysts wed w papally&a CW1, 

,w. K.uner ree.nr gmaion 

a 

i d enosM From ^yrâ BytStoedL we //' 

Penick Sim Maraca Caxrnt • D2214 TOC • 9040: pH(UI)-90JJ; 

.wSeo by lyawMd•ss/2;Mnwb•15N:ICAoou-JOO,k Pcaaa 3NiM 

e op:drd BpR~ed Fo.w Dwortlaa Received BNSwad In ORn,Moe 

li wist dBy/Rc w a liam OelaAlma Byruarad to D=Mm 

Reaayaidrd By/Rame xd Fo-r Darrrwr racoied By/s wed in Ducrilroa 

F f3`^r1 ' of - 

T2;i3 {Q SSy ^0 ^^ .• 

{^ 1 

LABORATORY R"cn'Od By TWO - OrWtatr 

SE ON 

FIN MPLE Disposal Me" Dbpwad By pRldrhnc 

DLShdzMON 

SHI•EV01I (08/2912005) 

45 Days 

Matdx 

a.ar 

w+.ar 

w.w 

W.w 

°'O1 ^^ 

Mosoâs.` 

woa.t...a 

^... 

^^ 

'

Washington Closure Hartford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051.68 P-Pt of t 

Collector 

STANKOVICH. M. 

coku Dalanatiou 

100& 300 Area Component orlhe RCBRA - Inctemenel So 

Compaa9 Contact 

JOAN KFSSNER 

Saartallu Locu llou 

100•KRIPARIAN94 

Telepho ne No. 

37$4688 

Proiect Coordinator 

KESSNER,IH 

SAFNo. 

RC-0s 

Pike COde 8L Data 7Lrnaramd 

Air Quality 45 [3y Days 

Ice and No. Faeld Lo:book No. 

EL-I596 

COA 

DESRAS6520 

- Msthod of Slip—, 

GROUNDTRANSPORT 

Shipped To 

CHWHIL. 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE IIAZARDSp2EMARKS 

Qualls Property No. 

A060151 

Bm of LedipdAlr R91 Na. 

NONE 

Presunuon ^' 

KIM 

Special IJatldlipgand/or Storage 

- 


GIP 

J 

Fly 

I 

Vic P90 3for ariSLml na irrial to Car paliirfor MJSpreparmion and 

No. of Container(s) 

alkimling, page Jfor"amulpka/fmcdo s to Eber line. A Me 2 IWDS 40005 

for chemical analytical fmcrionr to Lionville. 

Volume 

SAMPLEANALYSIS kampli 

so pap (u) $ol rea 

SFa6d To{say 

s. A."M&J%3: 

sa il lr...eda 

Tm,wy 

Afraatun2 

Sample No. matrix • Sample Date SampkTorte a' F:?'r'•:,' 

a4. i...-.r ' -i _'3 

J11J87 SOIL 3-2 6—O v a^ 

14:30 

v+, 

RSA"{?..: ',tYw-cwv:' n;. .. -•• G, ^; ': .''. 

c!%T.TJ t 'i: r,... 9, ^. .. '. ... .0 P 44 44, , ., 

CIIAINOFPOSSESSION 

rtrnay4^xad:By/RamorodFrom 

91 me l 

' d 

0 ByM,,pvrd Fran 

Si alpriart Names 

Gae/rma RearivetByRsotiir^ 

T 

s'^27^? ri 

1J: 

Rmdo By4WMIs 

^^ 

'J^0 

1-2 

D 


Tbra emub kdcxm that mk0 g d aoL mayusa 

be la 4 94ambSaaaivni9.90-Total Sr 

sv.oyaiaoactim 

-Theseowuwdcaieda mbaaw pJyairtudbprapaly emamsCOCfan 

Cadau Joao lCcaaa tar atry gacaiam.' 

(1) pankid Sim CDrySevey-D422;Idaaaa Cadea-D2216;TOC-9060:pH(Satp-9043- 

Miapa0y)Vd&W-3313:Aawmia-530. 3- tCA 01a 0 -l0G.x9acutS0w 

Manx' 

agar 

sr++(. 

0 

os.amuer 

Wh Wdkd ByrRatpved From 

Ga9uetcd DytRennsW Fram 

Drd(iap 

grdldm 

Rxdred ByrStasdb 

Re¢Ived ByKtoiedV 

Dwellur 

gtaTdn 

t=IyLOHSorZ w 

seas 

wwaarn 

x-orr 

(tellaquished D*RemmTd from DaWTIM Radred ByrStaad Ix Dalarnme 

LABORATORY 

SECTION 

Raaerd By Tdk 

1 _ r sl ,_. 0 (7^ 

gL^t'CN -ia 1. 

FIN AMPLE Deposal aaahae Dapaud By - Dar/ruro 

D ON 

BHI-EP I1 (08128/2605) 

1a 

7g. 'r. . . 

lperivas

Washington Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS RE QUEST '. RC-OSI.96 r•P i. or I 

Collator Conmanv Contact Telephone No. Proicct Coordinator 

SrANKOVK:H,K JOAN KESSNER 3754699 KESSNER, IH Price Code SL Dala Turnarolwd 

P rolect Desianation Smmlun Location SAFNo. 

100 & 700 Arc* Compone nt of the RCORA- Incrememat So 10" RIPARIAN 09 RC-05 I 

(ea Chnt No. Field Lotbook No. 

COA Mclbod of Sldomcnl 

EL1596 I BESRASGSZO GROUNDTRANSPORT 

Air Quality q 

45 Days 

Shinned To 

C112MMLL 

O((Site Prodenv No. 

A0601S1 

616 of Ladinr/Atr Bill No. 

SEE OSPC 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE IIAZARDS/RL iARKS -• •— 

- 

—^ •^ -^ 

NONE 

PruenwUOO 

• J 


We pale JMoritlnalaaurrial to CanTdlirforJUSprrparmion and 


Na, of Conlalnerls) 

G/P 

1 

PJG 

t 

oligaado., pair 1for rodlaaewl)viroffraaiane to ELedW. A pale 2 

farfAfmilY/ PMII\YAaJ/M•Ifwal /a (Jlalf/nn 

Volume 

gggp3 dapp3 


Sample No, Match• Sample Dale sample Time 

JIIJFIS SOIL 

Stria Twlk p 

bMry bm ASTM 11190. 

SnawaPwr 

TM &I 

Asndaym 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION S4rvWnt Names SPECUL PNSTROCTIONS 

Mauna 

Tku MWU M&OW dW uka ilcd one aaalyles b a kcMIM Pita Saa *GIar39,90-TOW Se 

6.puidN ByAtcnn•PI Due/rmP Rat t Ia Dwe/nmr 

a.s^ 

i 

1 t`' •l`.^ ^ra^ j `• d `^ W',14 ThenhonaL nvb;aa;nr due din Y*aa•*aalpk abdb popAy (omwCO('Jlant 

el' B yfy.o.rO Rom Da1Nrb ^3C 0 n D? 

Coauetima Ketmafera*yqutsdem, 04"W 

(1)Prdcleliu(OrySine)•n/2; Moktbe Colaad•D :Ie;TOC•9MO: pl WCU • 9oei; 

1 1Deu/riau 

r 

.^.. 

kaeuishcd OriRePmM rvomr 1 r0yTaedM rawTkk //-J .maaMKkuala • u1.zAa.aP:,.3w.3:tcAlaom.wao-.rolefntsaaar a,..^... 

aagaiuca OyMtamed eon D.Wff m Acwd Oyc;b a 14 Daem"ne 

6ng 4k4 Byrarmand From IAAYrmc Received Byi and M DwHram 

ualgai t" Oplemo ed RPm Dow1nm a Received Oy/5blsd N Dxdrkm 

1 _ , - L 91-13 h- taSl Z 

LADORATORY tteaehed Dy We Dooe/t-Mx , 

SECTION 

F. L SAMPLE DuP"Ial Medbd ^ D'opwcd By D Arrilc 

iWOSITION 

BH^-011(08/28/2005) 

. 

n1^lAPa1n1^4 

Kt4PIM 

Scarf

IW 70 

Washington Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS RE UFST RC-051.99 J PIF t « t 

Rector 

STANKOVICH, M. 

Conmar Coatad 

JOAN KESSNFA 

Telabone No. 

3754688 

rota[Designation SemolinsLonOoa SAFNa 

100 &300 Area Component of 1be RCBRA - Inoamental So UPPER RIPARIAN / 1 2 RC-0S I 

ice Chest No. r Field Loahook No. COA Medw of Shioaneut 

E41596 sESRAS6S20 GROUND TRANSPORT 

Sldaoed To Offtue8ronerty No. Bi ll 

CH2MHR.L 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE ARKS 

A060151 

of Ldlne/Abr II01 No. 

SEE OSPC 

NONE 

Preservation 

H... tar. 

Special handling and/or Storage 

Um page JlororlgLw/taoariol to Corvolhijbr MIS preporoiion od 

oligwNins, pope JJarrediaosatytiroifmcrions to Eberine. A post 2 

. fordietnhol owlydrd/roniowto llatHlle. 

Type of Centel= 

No. of Coutstucrts) 

Vaium! 

^ 1 

5FQ 

NO 

1 

40009 

saewUlln s.eau•a 

Zp w T.n.ar 

SAMPLEANALYSIS -`" soa1, 

Protect Coord inator 

KESSNER, JH Coda Data Turnaround 

Price SL 

pitQBality O 

1 sam jeNc, 1 Mauia• I SamoleOwe I SawleTime 1_-^k?4iI u;?$ d :'' 1...:'I':%i •_'1` -;.'.:::1:_? 1?:f L•;+: • i Ir 1-. 

45 Days 

)J1 1.iNa I SOIL 1 LI , 2 -d r,1 1 IQ' U4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -- 1 

CtiAINOF 

BrItco ned Fwo 

Bymenw.w Fr.at 

DatetGoe— 

"yaw-al" 


;^ 1 Dae/nme 

7bessouts WiwKtawiku kricdout,.tolrea lobe lwluatd*MStraalun•99,90-T0t0Sf 

amty8s 6xim 

'- The mrla Wine eat Ail Is a aoowlysn Bed to piopMy fenm COC fact 

DalaRhm Cana Joan Kww Awmy q-niaa 

J) Penick Siu(Dry$k-)-DI2$Mduat Can" -Dnl&. TOC - 90M pH OQ-9D41 

e/+ V U'3 'NWWaby KJcldaN-331.kA^maiu-JSLLJ:ICAaima-70MD;Aw awS"c. T ` 

— 

Darrrbn 

LABORATORY R eceMd By Tws Dw.4 7 e 

SECTION 

FINAL SAMPLE Diapaal We," Dopow By Rae/Tnu 

DISPOSITION 

tSHI•EE-0 11 (0WW2005) 

y.3 a3

Washington Closure Hanford CHAIN OF CUSTODY/SAMPLE ANALYSIS REQUEST RC-051-95 Poor J or 1 

Cotleebr ts>/\ ,-Z !/^ Q Comnaul Conta ctTelephone No. Pro te ct Coordinator 

JOAN KESSNHR 375.4688 KESSNER. IH 

Prolcct DeslmlaLlon . Semolina Location SAFNo. 

100 R 300 Ara Component of the RCRRA - Incremen tal So 100 •FRD'ARIAN h RC-051 

Ice Chest No Fleid Loabook No. COA Method o(shioment 

E-1596 BESRAS6520 OROIINDTRANSPORT 

Price Code $8Turnaround 

Dala Turnaround 

Air Quality n 

SWowd To 

CHWHI L 

POSSIBLE SAMPLE HAZARDS/RBMARKS 

Offsaa Prooerty No. 

A0601SI 

Big of Lodhir/A ir B01 No. 

SEEOSPC 

NONE 

Preservation 

1b. 

M00i , 

' 

Special IiaDdh'BgattNorStorage 

Unpage 3fw original xwerial to Co ollirforMJSpmpatudw and 

TFpeCon ot tainer 

No. of Cowainer (s) 

GrP 

1 

No 

1 

atiquating. pose Ifor radionnablZra/frartions to FLrrlioe,& pose 2 

fwNlrndrol onalylka/fmrnowto timnille. 

Volume 

lows 40008 


' 

Sneml(llir Searles 

SwW TmkYr 

^mtos 

SwM...ea 

STM LI 

Arrw tsm 

Samp le No. Matrix • . Sample Dab Sample Time - 

JIIJH4 BOIL _ —U ',06 

45 Days 

CHAIN OF POSSESSION 

ReOagvuhed BYlRtnnrcd Fioo WwtFm 

Slgw datNoma 

^By ^5ârcdL Doa?one ^( 

SPECIALINSTRDCTIONS 

Taex mA'r leEirab drY eekg fincd aw,enlylee bhe McWrd.iW Saaiddama9.90— TOW L 

Matrix 

f.sw 

t n6ho a Fmm 

QQ.^ 

Dr 101 30 

41 ZlN\ 

llAbondla 

l — 

awirm 

/ "Theo acts lndore 0alaia lea ponanellsie pvdbpropory fomwCOC force 

toraaJoea t:eueer tora.J aaestmar• 

m•w 

n 

te6 Br/Rcaxncd DaWIm g 

'y/1 , 

,,((,9'. micim Sim (DrrSkvo-w : maiuw Co'".. =1k.; TOC. 9060; PH(Soio-9045. 

rh'KitldrN •331.kMmoda . I50.k (CAOiaa•700A:fwrae9oeM £.'•â 

o'0ie 

w• qtr 

k6rpride:d By/Renn.ed Pon° 

Ichaquutcd 11070"ored Fmm DaWrm 

B)/Stped 

Received spamd in 

DaWFin 

DN&TM 

. 

rn.r 

a'I.Vgr 

4{•pe 

rvyr.• . 

tearquWnd DS/Remored From MWFm BySuxW N DaWrm 

LABORATORY Raetrod DF Tate - owcalwa ' 

SECFION 

FINAL SAIdIPLE Dirpoml Method Duprmd By Detelrtns 

DISPOSITION 

3H1-EE-0 11 (0a/21Y2005)

SAF-RC-051 100 & 300 Area Component. of the ... - Hanford Site

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?